Log In | Register
We now know what most have believed for the past eight days. The human remains found less than ½ mile from the Anthony home are those of missing Caylee Anthony. The FBI Lab used nuclear DNA developed from a tooth or bone of the deceased to produce a DNA profile what was compared to the known DNA profile of Caylee Anthony. It was a match. Now what is next?
Roy Kronk, the local meter reader that found the remains in a wooded area near the Anthony home on 12/11, also reported his suspicions concerning the same area over four months ago. Questions remain regarding why he waited four months to follow up on his own tip to law enforcement, but like the rest of this case, this is the tip of an iceberg that needs to be fully exposed.
The FBI Evidence Response Team needed at least three different sieves of varying sizes in order to find the many tiny bones that once made up a little girl, the one we see over and over on television as she sings, reads, and acts like a normal two-year-old. Now all that remains are tiny bones and pictures that will grow old, but Caylee will always be two. Christmas is a time that families come together, a time for children as, after all, Christmas is for kids. The Anthony family will see December 25, 2008 as their first of many without their granddaughter Caylee, and in this case, without their daugher Casey.
The local medical examiner announced that the remains were those of Caylee. She also indicated Caylee had died from homicide, but the manner of death was unknown, and may never be known. No soft tissue was recovered from the bones found at the body disposal site although hair consistent with the victim was recovered with the victim's skull. There was no indication of trauma to the bones, i.e., no injury to the bones prior to death. What was not indicated was the ME's ability to discriminate between trauma prior to death and evidence of post mortem activity, perhaps by animals that could be responsible for the distribution of the bones at the body recovery site. The ME indicated that her findings were based upon circumstantial evidence, examination of the remains, and other evidence from the recovery site and other locations. With someone as young as Caylee, though, a soft kill would not be evident; by this she could have been choked or smothered without leaving any indication of how she died.
In crimes such as this, there can be at least three crime scenes that investigators need to identify: where the murder took place, the vehicle used to transport the victim, and, the body disposal site. Authorities have the disposal site and may have evidence of transportation of the body in a car used by Casey Anthony. Where the murder or death of the child occurred has yet to be identified.
There is also the ongoing issue of the meter reader, the man who allegedly found the victim's remains. Did investigators fail to adequately follow up on the tipster's first three calls, or was the information so nonspecific, just one of 5,600 tips that have come in, that the remains were somehow missed. The disposal site was more than two acres in size, much of which was overgrown with scrub trees, weeds, underbrush, and inhabited by a few rattlesnakes and other small critters. Trash was evident throughout the area and the report of a suspicious plastic bag would not, in and of itself, cause a major search to be conducted of the area. What was potentially lost, though, was the presence of soft tissue on the remains that could have been tested for evidence of drugs and chemicals, and perhaps, the ability to actually suggest the cause of death.
My challenge with the information concerning the recovery of Caylee's body is that if the meter reader felt so strongly concerning the area that he called authorities three different times to report a suspicious bag, why didn't he just pick up the bag and look inside himself, and why did he wait four months to search the area? Of course I am assuming, and we know what happens when one assumes. Mr. Kronk may, for example, have searched the area on multiple occasions before finding the remains of Caylee. Many questions; few answers. Why did he feel the need to obtain the services of an attorney? After all, why couldn't he tell his story and stick to it, although there may well be much more to his story that is known by investigators and today many feel that you just can't be too careful.
The medical examiner left the door open for the still to come toxicology examination, but again, without soft tissue/flesh, investigators are left to examining bone marrow, teeth and hair. Bone marrow is a rich source of blood that could show long-term ingestion of poison or other chemicals, and the hair, which grows 1 cc per month, could show the presence of foreign substances, to include illegal drugs, medicines, and, perhaps, chloroform, however the latter could have evaporated before being identified in the victim's remains. By this, with no evidence of injury to the bones, to include the skull of the victim, and should the toxicology examination produce nothing of investigative interest, this without the person responsible for Caylee's death coming forward and telling the truth, we may never know how she died. Although this is not necessarily unusual in such cases, it does present a challenge for the prosecution, and an opening for the defense.
It is, of course, the job of the defense to suggest and/or create reasonable doubt in the mind of future jurors. Combine the questions that have arisen concerning the actions of the meter reader with the undetermined method of death and this case may present significant problems for the prosecution. How, for example, will the prosecution prove murder one? The future jury will know that the child died and was the likely victim of a homicide, but the who, the where, the when and the why still need to be answered.
What we have yet to hear is any evidence suggesting that the victim's remains were under water for a significant period of time. We know that Hurricane Fay swept through this area on August 20, seven, eight, and nine days respectively after the telephone calls to authorities by the meter reader. If the remains were placed in this location prior to August 20, then Casey could have placed them there. But if the remains are believed to have been placed there after the hurricane waters eventually receded, this when Casey was either under surveillance or in jail, then obviously someone else had to place them there.
A window of reasonable doubt has been opened with the finding of Caylee's remains. The defense dream team will all attempt to climb through this window while investigators attempt to slam it shut. The delusion that George and Cindy clung to has now been exposed to the cruel light of the crime scene. Whether in denial or just supporting their daughter, the Anthony's must not only face the loss of their granddaughter, but also the potential of their daughter's involvement in Caylee's demise. And when Casey was told of the identification of the remains as her daughter, she sent her church pastor away, choosing to speak instead to her lawyer. Was she in shock, had she prepared herself for this information, did she already know before being told, or did she know that authorities would be watching and chose not to expose her emotions by talking to her pastor?
Evidence from the Car Trunk
One thing the defense will need overcome is the findings of the FBI Laboratory concerning the trunk of Casey's car. Examination of the carpet in the trunk revealed at least 51 individual chemicals, 41 or (80%) that are consistent with evidence of human decomposition, seven of which are significant evidence of the chemicals associated with human decomposition, only one of which is chloroform. Nearly all of the compounds present in the early stage of human decomposition were detected in the carpet, none of which are associated with animal decomposition. By this, the story told by the grandparents about rotting pizza or dead squirrels simply does not coincide with the scientific evidence. Perhaps the nanny stole Casey's car when she kidnapped Caylee...
If guilty, can we expect that Casey will eventually feel the need to clear her conscience? Probably not. Casey appears to have a well-developed self preservation instinct, one that protects her from self incrimination. Should she become convinced that she can be convicted she might then, and only then consider a plea bargain, but otherwise expect to hear that the nanny did it.
Start Tracking
Stop Tracking
caroaber,
Weren't we all but once a body was found, she had to be somebody's daughter... Now to find her killer - hopefully there's some physical evidence that will help, even after 101 days.
CVZ
