counter for tumblr

EXPOSING THE MYTHS, Part #1: Chloroform

If it’s not the duct tape or decomp that gets thrown up in the air by the clueless masses, then it’s the chloroform. The one word answer that instantly solves the entire case.

The myths banded about go something like this:

“Casey used chloroform to knock out Caylee prior to murdering her. She must have done cos’ she searched for chloroform 84 times on her PC. Chloroform was also found in her car and in the trunk of her car where Caylee was hidden. They also found a syringe and a Gatorade bottle filled with chloroform close to Caylee’s remains. They found chloroform on Caylee’s doll. It’s obvious what happened! Casey knocked Caylee out with chloroform then murdered her! There’s no other explanation!”

Now let’s take a step back and add some common sense to the equation here. Let’s look at the facts instead regarding the chloroform, computer searches and the reported chloroform evidence.

The computer searches:

When it comes to the computer related searches, we can always speculate & assume (as the Prosecution did throughout the trial) on who searched for what and why… but what we do know is that there was a Google search performed on a PC in the Anthony home for the word “chlorAform” – which returned results for “chloroform”. The visit to the chloroform related page lasted just a few seconds.

However this was searched for just the 1 time, and not “84 times” as the prosecution claimed. (see below for more info on this subject).

To be exact on the search terms here, Sandra Osborne (OSCO Computer examiner) testified that all of the following search terms were found on the PC taken from the Anthony’s home:

Chloroform, neck breaking, making weapons of household products, hand to hand combat, head injuries, chest trauma, ruptured spleen, death, self defense, inhalation & internal bleeding.

Now to be fair, many of those searches could very easily have been done by Cindy Anthony. Why? Because Cindy is a nurse and there’s a lot of medical terminology in there. The other terms like “hand to hand combat” and “self defense” were probably done by Lee Anthony as they’re what you would call male-related search terms. The main concern here though is specifically the chloroform search.

Cindy Anthony perjured herself during the trial by saying she’d made the chloroform computer searches in March 2008… but a far more feasible explanation for the single search would have been Casey’s basic curiosity.

Casey’s boyfriend at that time, Ricardo Morales posted what he thought was a humorous picture on his MySpace page in early 2008. It was the now infamous picture with the headline that said “Win her over with chloroform”.

Here’s the actual picture Morales posted:

Morales earlier told detectives the picture was “kind of funny”, and testified at the trial that he posted it “as a joke”.

He also didn’t remove the picture from his MySpace page until after Casey was arrested. Casey broke up with Morales mid-April 2008, two months before Caylee was last seen alive.

Getting back to the searches again: It’s apparent that Casey did not know what chloroform was, so she looked it up. When she did, she learned it was a popular anaesthetic from the early 1900’s. If she’d researched the subject any further she would have also have enlightened herself to the fact that chloroform is virtually impossible to manufacture by an individual, without killing themselves in the process.

As if the inference that a 22 year old girl would actually attempt the arduous & dangerous task of replicating a drug from the early 1900’s in her garage was not ridiculous enough, the prosecution also wanted us to believe that Casey actually used it to kill her child. To add more fuel to the fire, the prosecution also falsely stated that the word was searched for 84 times, when they were fully aware that was not the case.

This brings us nicely to the next section of this post.

The flawed search evidence:

The bottom line here is that there were not 84 searches for chloroform. There was just the 1. This is what the defense claimed throughout the trial, but the prosecution tried to convince the jury otherwise.

This ultimately culminated in John Bradley (theCacheBack” software developer) testifying to the 84 searches, then (soon after) doing a complete u-turn and admitting the discrepancy. The prosecution were well aware of this error too which explains why they decided against using it in their closing arguments, even though they brought it up numerous times during the trial itself.

When asked by Jose Baez about the number of searches, Sgt. Kevin Stenger (OCSO Computer Crimes Supervisor) confirmed there was just the 1 search – the results being generated by the other analysis program called Net Analysis.

Here’s a report on the discrepancy from MSNBC:

Flawed search evidence produced during Trial

The chloroform-filled syringe & bottle:

It has been widely reported – for the best part of 3 years now – that a chloroform-filled syringe was found in the bag that contained Caylee’s remains. In addition, a bottle of Gatorade was also found at the crime scene, that too being filled with chloroform.

Both reports are wrong. Here’s why:

The Syringe:

At the trial, the prosecution’s own FBI chemist, Dr. Michael Rickenbach testified that the syringe found at the crime scene was filled with mostly testosterone (a male hormone). There was only a small amount of chloroform residue in the syringe itself.

The Gatorade bottle:

Dr. Michael Rickenbach also tested the fluid inside the Gatorade bottle. He confirmed that the exact content of the bottle couldn’t be identified specifically… but it appeared to be some sort of cleaning fluid with very low amounts of chloroform present. Note: Chloroform residue is found in cleaning fluid.

High levels of chloroform found in Casey’s car:

With regards to the prosecution claims that “high levels of chloroform” were found in Casey’s Pontiac Sunfire – this can be explained as follows:

When George & Cindy picked up Casey’s car from Johnson’s tow yard, due to “the smell”, Cindy sprayed the entire car with Febreze, which as you many know is an air freshener.

The prosecution wheeled out the wacky Dr. Arpad Vass at trial, who subsequently testified that when he took “air samples” from Casey Anthony’s car he found “shockingly high levels of chloroform”.

However, there was only one problem with his findings. The gadget he used to take the air samples was one he’d invented himself. I believe he called it a “gas chromatograph”. He’s actually got a patent pending on his gadget so if law enforcement buys it he stands to make a fortune. Don’t hold your breath for that though.

In addition, testing the air for decomposition and using it as evidence has not been allowed in any criminal court anywhere in the country, as “air testing” is not even an established science. So Dr. Vass used his own self-built air sniffing machine to test the air in the trunk of Casey’s car – and impressed himself no end by jumping to the conclusion the car trunk was packed full of chloroform.

Now… compare Dr. Vass’ shenanigans with that of Dr. Michael Rickenbach, the FBI chemist. Dr. Richenbach testified for the prosecution that he tested the carpet lining in Casey’s trunk and there were low levels of chloroform residue found. This is in stark contrast to Dr Vass and his “shockingly high levels of chloroform” statement. The only thing shockingly high was Dr Vass’ level of stupidity.

Furthermore, Dr. Rickenbach stated that chloroform can be found in water and common cleaning detergents – which brings us full circle back to Cindy having sprayed the entire car with Febreze air freshener. So the chloroform residue found in the car most likely came from Cindy spraying the car with Febreze – not from any ridiculous chloroform-induced murder attempt as the prosecution always falsely claimed.

One last point:

Caylee’s baby doll also had chloroform on it, which was consistent with chloroform found on other dolls owned by the Anthony’s.

The prosecution reported that Caylee Anthony’s baby doll – found in Casey’s car – tested positive for chloroform.

Well, when Cindy took Caylee’s doll out of Casey’s car, she wiped the doll with a Clorox wipe (i.e. a cleaning detergent), then went on to spray the doll with Febreze (an air freshener).

When addressing these points, Dr. Rickenbach stated that it’s normal that a doll would have miniscule amounts of chloroform.

When he found the chloroform on Caylee’s doll, he asked a colleague to bring in another doll similar to Caylee’s – and when he tested it there was chloroform on that doll too. It transpires that chloroform is present on dolls in small amounts. Remember too – this was the prosecution’s own witness – a FBI Forensic Chemist Examiner.

Click here to see Dr. Michael Rickenbach’s trial testimony in full from June 7th

In summary:

All of the above information pretty much blows away the much favored theories that Casey used chloroform to knock out Caylee prior to murdering her… or that chloroform was searched for 84 times on her PC… or that chloroform was found in Casey’s car & trunk… or that there was a chloroform-filled syringe & Gatorade bottle at the scene.

Not to mention the fact that chloroform has never been used before to kill a child in the US, or to murder anyone for that matter – ever!

The whole chloroform madness was part of a wildly insane puzzle that people tried to piece together to show Casey actually planned the murder of Caylee. BS.

The fact that the cops found the chloroform search term on the Anthony’s computer was also twisted around to try and prove premeditation. There’s one other problem with this whole theory too… that being the fact that nobody buys or uses chloroform to kill someone. It’s not used for that. People buy or use chloroform to knock people out. No one uses it for murder, because it is purely an agent for putting someone to sleep (as seen in countless spy movies).

Yes, we’ve all heard many stories about mothers who wanted to knock out their screaming kid with something… and many of them Tylenol PM, Benadryl or alcohol to name just a few.

My point here is just because there was a search for chloroform, that does not imply premeditation or an intent to murder.

The whole inference that chloroform & duct tape were somehow used as “murder weapons” were part of the web of lies fed to the public for the past 3 years. (I’ll be writing about the duct tape myths in the next post in this series).

Strange as all that sounds, there are actually people out there that fell for the state’s fantasy forensics, junk science & fairytales – hook, line and sinker… and still do to this day.

Thankfully the members of the jury did not.

—————————————————

If after reading the above, you still want to bang the same old drum about Casey using chloroform to knock out Caylee prior to murdering her, then so be it.

Feel free to post your comments below on the subject – and let’s see where it take us.

SJ

Comments

  1. Gillian Weeks says:

    LOL Very good post.. I believe I shall bookmark this post. Your site is the best so far, the easiest to navigate, and the most supportive I have seen. Thank you for supporting Ms Casey Anthony.. Fight the good fight.. =)

    • Hi Gillian. Welcome to the #1 Casey Anthony website and thanks for your comments! SJ

    • I’m from the UK therefore the case is not publicised here and the media haven’t mentioned this case, to my knowledge; I read most magazines/papers published here and I’ve not heard of it. I borrowed a book ‘Mummy’s Little Girl’ and have googled information since because the whole case is so bizarre! I’ve looked at why Casey is guilty sites? why Casey is innocent sites? However the fascination with this case, for me, lies within the unknown. Caylee died, fact! Caylee was hidden in woods, fact! Casey left home suddenly – fact! Caylee was not seen by anyone since approx 16th June – fact! So she died, someone killed her, she was a beautiful, innocent child and did not deserve to die, she deserved to be buried/cremated in a decent manner and yet nobody has been held responsible for her life cut short. NOBODY knows the truth except maybe Caylee and most definitely her killer. From reading the book, watching trial and prison clips and the Dr Phil Interviews with Anthony’s I’m no wiser in answering the question ‘Who killed Caylee and why?’ Perhaps she is guilty but I question the motives. She was a proven liar yes! She was portrayed as a good mother by every witness too. So the ‘my child is a burden’ theory doesn’t make sense. She could have left Caylee with Cindy? ….

  2. Terrific– we need to get this info out there. Nothing like the truth to shut up the wackos. xxxj

  3. I understand exactly where you are putting all of this together. Much of this contradictory testimony and ghost theories were outlined right in the words of the testimony. These items are all old news to me, but I watched every minute of the testimony. It doesn’t appear the media did; or most likely decided to exclude those connections since Nancy Grace already had the ball rolling of conviction by circumstance and not by fact.
    I think you’re doing a great thing covering the putting of the pieces back together’ I tried for many days during the testimony to point these things out; but for most people I talked to…their minds were already made up by the Nancy Grace broadcasts.
    Anywho, great reading and I love your site. The bottom line is that the court system worked as designed in this case and Casey is STILL INNOCENT because she was never proven guilty of anything. Unfortunately the most of the world doesn’t agree and still will condemn her; then again I don’t expect the majority of people to spend much time finding out facts and logic for themselves in this day and age of “learn anything in just a few minutes.”

  4. Roscommon Conn Patrick McDonnell says:

    100% Correct. I told you that you could do this better than me, buddy. Great job!

  5. Hey folks! Thanks for all your comments on part #1 in this series. There’s plenty more to come. Despite all the hate & BS still rife out there, we’re on a mission here to enlighten the masses and get the TRUTH out on all the lies & fantasies concocted by the prosecution during the trial and the media over the past 3 years. The truth is out there, for anyone that wants to hear it. Whether they can handle it is another matter completely. I would guess not, as many of them apparently had their minds made up for them LONG before the trial even started. Anyways, we’re flying the flag for Casey & Cays and this IS a battle we’re gonna win – so let’s get the word out there far & wide using all means possible. Thanks again! SJ

  6. Great article and very well written, I can’t wait to read more! 🙂

  7. She did not look up “What is Chloroform?” (Because she was a star gazed romantic who wanted to find out what her beau meant). She searched for “HOW TO MAKE CHLOROFORM”!!!! Then SHE PRINTED IT AND SAVED A COPY. It only takes ONE time to look something up to get the info you need.

    • Hey. The “How to make…” search was never proven. It was merely inferred by LDB during John Bradley’s testimony. What you are claiming now is that Casey searched for “How to make…”, remembered the recipe, then went out, bought the ingredients and made her own chloroform. All of which never happened. There was no chloroform related to the death of Caylee Anthony at all. Try reading my post again then come back when your statements are not based on wishful thinking. SJ

      • Roscommon Conn Patrick McDonnell says:

        First of all, I’d like to say, government shouldn’t be able to search anyone’s computer, and this is case in point. They assumed Casey made those searches, but, really the searches were completely harmless and not all made by her. Also neighbors or visitors can make searches, people can steal your internet and the list goes on and on. So, in short, computer records should not be admissable in court, but that’s not the point.

        The point is:
        “How to make…” was never searched for. I think it’s pretty clear that just searching for “ChlorAform” is pretty much the same as “What is Chloroform.” Think, if you wanted to find out what something, let’s say sushi, was, you would just type in “sushi,” not “what is sushi.” And, if she was REALLY plotting to use it for murder, don’t you think she MIGHT know how to spell it. Also, I think it’s fairly obvious that those medical searches were done by Cindy. My mom is a Nurse and I remember her on the internet all day searching for stuff like that. In addition, as an older brother myself, I can say it is definitely no stretch to say Lee would search for “making weapons out of household objects.” (Something I used to be very good at as a kid.) Finally, the “Gas Chromotograph” or whatever the heck that idiot Dr. Vass calls it it TOTALLY INADMISSABLE. It hasn’t been patented or even scientifically tested. I don’t know HOW Judge Dumb (Belvin Perry) let this into court.

        Final note: how would one possibly know she printed it out and saved it? There are no records to say whether someone printed something out or not.

        P.S.
        SJ, I’m sure I missed something, when you find it, tell me what it is.

        • M Whitten says:

          If the police were allowed to build a case for murder based on Internet searches, I’d be locked up right now waiting in line for a lethal injection.

          • And I would be right there with you, along with a good portion of the American population that surf’s the web!!

    • M Whitten says:

      First, even if she did look up “how to make chloroform” (which they never proved) how would this high-school dropout be able to make chloroform? Making chloroform isn’t like baking a batch of cookies; it requires a college-level knowledge base of laboratory chemistry as well as professional grade lab equipment. Everyone acts like you can just search how to make chloroform on the Internet and then just “lah dee dah” over to your local grocery store, come home, and whip up a fresh batch…nonsense.

      Ok, let’s assume that Casey Anthony (who everyone would agree isn’t very smart) somehow learns how to make Chloroform and has the necessary lab equipment to do so. How would she be able to make chloroform at her parents house without her parents seeing her performing these lab experiments, without the neighbors smelling her lab experiments, and without leaving any physical evidence of these lab experiments? The answer is: she couldn’t, because she didn’t, because it’s bollocks.

  8. Do you know that in Casey’s letters she herself wrote that she used chloroform on Caylee so she could go out at night to party? I read the letter in her own handwriting. I think she wrote around 40 plus letters in jail.

    • Hi Maggie. Yes, I’d heard about it, but the fact is there was nothing about it in any of Casey’s jail letters. Instead there was hearsay & vague mumblings from fellow inmates Robyn Adams & Maya Derkovic. This is precisely why Jose Baez had no problem with the letters being released at that time. SJ

    • M Whitten says:

      Um, no, she didn’t. That rumor was some Nanct Grace bull crap.

  9. I think I caught whiff of an email somewhere along the line from Dr. Vass himself stating that be felt the chloroform stuff was released prematurely. Do you know if this is true?

    • Hi Sam! Being honest, I’m not even sure if Dr Vass knows what planet he’s on, let alone anything credible. Yes, he “tried” to do his thing when testifying, but it was all fantasy forensics, and evidence that just wasn’t credible. He apparently opened a can in the Pontiac trunk… sealed the can… then took it away to analyze the can contents with his own smell-sniffing gadget. Totally ridiculous to even have that evidence admitted into the trial in the first place. Thanks for posting. SJ

  10. Bottomline here are a couple of things. You only need reasonable doubt about the chloroform and the defense provided that and then some to the point that I don’t believe the chloroform BS for one second anymore.

    First you have Dr. Vass’ (Forensic Anthropologist) saying shockingly high levels of chloroform. But, then you have Dr. Rickenbach (FBI Forensic Chemist) saying the levels were normal and can be found in everyday household cleaners. Who do you believe? I’m going with the trained chemist from the world’s best crime lab on this one in a heartbeat.

    Secondly, Ricardo Morales photo easily explains away the ONE search. Multiple choices come up when you try to Google something and how to make chloroform could have been one of many options. I saw a while back, but there was a photobucket picture of Ricardo’s chloroform joke that was date stamped that he uploaded it on March 18th. The date stamp is very faint on the bottom left hand corner. http://i388.photobucket.com/albums/oo326/misconline/orv7mq.jpg. I’m pretty sure photobucket is used readily for Facebook or photobucket is just a storage area on an outside source to keep photos and not have to store them to your hard drive. Or is this a photo from Facebook? If I’m wrong about that someone please feel free to correct me. Well, we know Casey looked at chloroform on March 17th so it’s reasonable to say that Ricardo was messing around with that photo at about the same time Casey looked up chloroform based on the March 18th upload to photobucket or Facebook. What are the odds that Casey looked up chloroform on the 17th and then a day later Ricardo added that photo to his My Space and Facebook/photobucket on the very next day? It tells me he probably had it posted on his My Space on or before March 17th and then added it to his photobucket on the 18th.

    Bottomline, there was no physical evidence of chloroform and Dr. Rickenbach’s testimony was plenty to give reasonable doubt regardless of the computer searches. I’ve always said the other searches by Casey were odd, but at the same time she was looking up neck-breaking she was also looking at self defense for women and house hold weapons. Maybe she had a reason to protect herself around that house? Total speculation I know, maybe she was worried someone might break in the house or attack her on the street, who knows. Maybe she read an article about self-defense and in the article neck-breaking was mentioned so she looked up neck-breaking. I know I go on some awfully weird tangents when I’m surfing the web and just a word in an article can spark my interest and I look up that word as well.

    • M Whitten says:

      If attorneys were able to build murder cases based on my Internet searches, I’d be locked up right now waiting in line for a lethal injection.

  11. I watched the whole trial and i feel the verdict was just! There was no evidence or proof of any kind that casey comitted this crime. I feel the defense team Jose Baez and Cheney Mason did an out standing job! I also feel that the over zealous DA jeff ashton is what is wrong with our legal system. Thank goodness logic and the truth prevailed in this case, it was a triumph for all americans who who still believe in innocent until proven guilty!

  12. Hey, I take it that you must have really kept up with this case. My question is that how do you know that Casey was really sexualy absued by her father? I read what all you think happened. I’m just curious is all. Thanks, Christy

    • Hi Christy! Abuse wise, I’m just going on the signs, and they’re all there. There is no concrete “proof” of abuse in that sense – and the same goes for GA’s abuse of Caylee… which again is why no 911 call was made. When all the truth does eventually come out, I’m sure it’ll be very close to my theory. SJ

  13. The whole chloroform theory is ludicrous. So Casey is clever enough to make chloroform yet dumb enough to leave Caylees remains several hundred yards down the road!? And wouldnt snooping Cindy have noticed not only the smell but the actual kit required? This is NOT kitchen sink technology!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3r_ZxIGXIUw&feature=related

    • M Whitten says:

      I’ve tried to get something posted a couple of times regarding some misconceptions regarding gas chromatography, and I’ve been unsuccessful. This is disappointing, because I think it needs to be addressed, and what I’m saying certainly isn’t “BS,” but I think maybe I’m getting screened for some of my language. Therefore, I’ll try it again without any cursing.

      I have read that some people believe that gas chromatography is a junk science based on the outcome of the Casey Anthony trial. I would like to clear up this misconception, as it wasn’t the science of gas chromatography that was a problem, rather, the problem was how Dr. Vass applied the science.

      First, gas chromatography is a real science that is very common among many types of scientists. Dr. Vass did not invent the gas chromatograph, nor did he invent gas chromatography. Dr. Vass did invent a special type of gas chromatograph which was designed specifically to be used by law enforcement. There is nothing inherently wrong with the science of gas chromatography.

      A gas chromatograph is used to determine the different types and amounts of chemical compounds in a given sample. For example, if I take a soil sample from my backyard and run it through a gas chromatograph, I may find that there was water, fertilizer, ammonia, detergent, and chloroform present in the sample. I cannot, however, draw any conclusion whatsoever that there was a “high level” or even an “elevated level” of any of these compounds. The gas chromatograph doesnt allow me to make those judgments. So, I cannot say that there is a “high” or “elevated” level of water in the soil, just as I cannot say that there is a “high” or “elevated” level of chloroform in the soil. If my hypothesis was that only water, fertilizer, ammonia, and detergent will be found in the soil, I can only conclude that chloroform is found in places that I wouldnt expect it to be found, but not that there was a high level of chloroform.

      Also, a scientist cannot use a gas chromatograph to draw conclusions regarding how or why a particular chemical compound is present in a sample. In my soil sample above, I cannot conclude that there was ammonia in the fertilizer used on my lawn simply because I found ammonia and fertilizer, because the ammonia could have come from animal urine. Similarly, I cannot conclude that someone was making chloroform nearby simply because chloroform was found in the sample, because chloroform is also present in decomposition.

      In summary, the only thing that the gas chromatography used in the Casey Anthony case told us is that chloroform is present in a place that we wouldnt expect it to be, not that there was a high level of it, and not that anyone poured it there or used it to murder a child.

      We have to be very careful of how we use and interpret scientific findings.

  14. M Whitten says:

    I have read that some people believe that gas chromatography is a junk science based on the outcome of the Casey Anthony trial. I would like to clear up this misconception, as it wasn’t the science of gas chromatography that was a problem, rather, the problem was how Dr. Vass applied the science.

    First, gas chromatography is a real science that is very common among many types of scientists. Dr. Vass did not invent the gas chromatograph, nor did he invent gas chromatography. Dr. Vass did invent a special type of gas chromatograph which was designed specifically to be used by law enforcement. There is nothing inherently wrong with the science of gas chromatography.

    A gas chromatograph is used to determine the different types and amounts of chemical compounds in a given sample. For example, if I take a soil sample from my backyard and run it through a gas chromatograph, I may find that there was water, fertilizer, ammonia, detergent, and chloroform present in the sample. I cannot, however, draw any conclusion whatsoever that there was a “high level” or even an “elevated level” of any of these compounds. The gas chromatograph doesnt allow me to make those judgments. So, I cannot say that there is a “high” or “elevated” level of water in the soil, just as I cannot say that there is a “high” or “elevated” level of chloroform in the soil. If my hypothesis was that only water, fertilizer, ammonia, and detergent will be found in the soil, I can only conclude that chloroform is found in places that I wouldnt expect it to be found, but not that there was a high level of chloroform.

    Also, a scientist cannot use a gas chromatograph to draw conclusions regarding how or why a particular chemical compound is present in a sample. In my soil sample above, I cannot conclude that there was ammonia in the fertilizer used on my lawn simply because I found ammonia and fertilizer, because the ammonia could have come from animal urine. Similarly, I cannot conclude that someone was making chloroform nearby simply because chloroform was found in the sample, because chloroform is also present in decomposition.

    In summary, the only thing that the gas chromatography used in the Casey Anthony case told us is that chloroform is present in a place that we wouldnt expect it to be, not that there was a high level of it, and not that anyone poured it there or used it to murder a child.

    We have to be very careful of how we use and interpret scientific findings.

  15. `Danielle says:

    I was so thankful I cried when the jury came back with a verdict of not guilty! I had family /friends/co-workers all disagreeing with me when I would argue all the points that have been stated on your website..I just could not believe the stupidity of EVERYONE that thought she was guilty. To me it was plain as day that she was innocent just by looking at the pictures of Casey and Caylee. You can see a mother’s love in Casey’s eyes. I have not read all that is on this website but I am a supporter and just wanted to say my part : Casey I know it is hard..no really I have no idea how hard it is for you but keep your head up and know that there are supporters and people that believe you are innocent! May God look after you and help your healing heart!

  16. I came to this site only recently, after subscribing to you on youtube. I’m glad to see there are people like me who still support Casey. If America wanted a guilty verdict so badly, they should’ve gone after George Anthony. Being an ex cop, he would know first hand how to stage a crime scene, how to manipulate the police, and so on. One thing worth noting, at least this is what I heard, is that it was George who was going around saying the smell in Casey’s trunk was that of human decomposition.

    I wouldn’t be at all surprised if George planted whatever tiny amount of evidence was there, he wanted so badly to keep Casey from telling anyone about the molestation, and being accused of murder would certainly serve to discredit her in a lot of people’s eyes. The haters are so ignorant!

  17. hey SJ, i’m doing a research project on the Casey Anthony trial. i really enjoyed researching your site, it gave me a lot to think about. i also have a couple of questions/comments:

    i. you said chloroform has not ever killed people, that is untrue so you may want to edit that.
    chloroform used to be used as anesthesia but sometimes people never woke up..
    http://www.history.com/topics/ether-and-chloroform

    ii. in regards to the forensic investigation from Casey’s car–what about the hair follicles found in truck that are consistent with those of a decomposed body?
    according to ABCnews.com
    “Also found in the trunk were pieces of Caylee Anthony’s hair discolored at the root in a way that matches a decomposing human body, the prosecution claimed.”

    iii. can you further explain the discrepancies in the number of times ‘chloroform’ was searched (i.e. 1 vs 84)

    iv. what do you think about the investigation that says ‘fool proof’ suffocation was searched thoroughly the last day Caylee was seen alive.. then the user went to myspace, an account used by Casey?

    i would love your input on these things as they are my biggest questions, thanks so much!

  18. Wow! I’m blown away! Unfortunately, I was a supporter of the Anti Casey club. I thought she was guilty but you have blown me away! I now feel that Casey is 100% innocent, I feel so bad for her. This is indeed one of the saddest stories I have ever read. I want to tell the world about this site, the evidence was clear and cut, no fallacies, everything presented so well. I pray that your site gains enough traffic for the world to know the truth. I’ll certainly do my part in spreading the word!

Speak Your Mind

*