What started out as the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith vs. Ford Shelley, Gina Shelley, G. Ben Thompson, Gaither Thompson and Melanie Thompson, or known as the Shelley and Thompson Clan of South Carolina. The people who broke into Horizons in the Bahamas and then allegedly sold a lot of tapes and pictures to TMZ (remember the Methadone refrigerator picture), Splash (including the tasteless picture of Daniel Smith in his casket), tons of videos to Fox News including On the Record with Greta Van Susteren, Geraldo Rivera Live, and the list goes on and on. Ford was one of the first to holler, Howard K. Stern did something to Daniel and Anna Nicole Smith, and the first at the trial to say Howard never hurt Anna……… so much for credibility. The question is though where is the money that all of that sold for????
Then enters what has become the big fish, Susan M. Brown Esq., Georgia Attorney and the Susan M. Brown Law Office, did this poor woman get left holding the bag and with the O’Quinn law firm dissolved there is no one to hand it off too. Kind of like playing musical chairs and the one left standing alone when the music stops, that would be Susan M. Brown.
Brown has tap danced for two years with the same song just different steps until she finally had a Northern District of Georgia Federal Court say she had waived the attorney client privilege under the crime fraud act…… NOT good for a lawyer’s resume, not to mention the State Bar of Georgia.
Any Objections to Susan M. Brown’s current lawyers, Joseph C. Wilson IV. and Carl E. Pierce II of Pierce, Herns, Sloan & McLeod LLC, has filed to withdraw as counsel for “the Brown Defendants”, stating it would not cause any prejudice because “the discovery concerning the Brown Defendants has not begun”. Do what??? The court ruled a long time ago that because Brown has been present for all of those depositions there would not be that much extra to tidy up the suit and have it ready for trial.
However the big WHAM in the March 2, 2011 filings is asking and filing the Motion to Withdraw with the grounds set out to substantiate the withdrawing should be in a Memorandum in Support filed UNDER SEAL “Counsel is not aware of any other means to communicate the grounds for withdrawal that would protect the confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship and avoid undue prejudice to the Brown Defendants.”
However the case they quote as outweighing the right of the public right to know (I. E. the News media) on its own raises red flags of the potential seriousness of these actions. In the Knight case it states; “we explained that, while a district court has a supervisory power over its own records and may, in its discretion, seal documents if the public’s right of access is outweighed by competing interests, the presumption in such cases favors public access. The public’s right of access to judicial records and documents may be abrogated ONLY IN UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES. Accordingly before a district court may seal any court documents, we held that it must 1) provide public notice of the request to seal and allow interested parties a reasonable opportunity to object. (That date was March 21, 2011 per the South Carolina Federal Court’s Docket). 2) consider less drastic alternatives to sealing the documents, and 3) provide specific reasons and factual findings supporting its decision to seal the documents and for rejecting the alternatives.”
The Motion ends that “Counsel will submit the Memorandum in Support of the Motion to Withdraw to the Court for the Court’s in camera review and shall not file same until further notice from the Court.
Well folks I don’t think there will be any jury selection starting tomorrow, and as of midnight there has been no objections or request for a hearing on the filing being done under seal…
So what do you think Susan M. Brown needs to be protective from “avoid undue prejudice”?
As soon as we have the Court’s decision, and new dates for jury selection will post it, it is noticeable that no lawyer has filed to just transfer the case to them, as new attorney of record, things that make you go Mmmmmmmmmmmm.
Be sure to participate in our COMMUNITY , get the most out of the site by learning your way around in the community where you can discuss things about the cases in a debate area of the site.
Visit our Download Section for all documents on the cases we are following:
We will be listening to all of our readers about new cases. Do you have a tip for us on a case to follow? If so Contact Us, a link appears at the top of all pages; ALL TIPS ARE OF COURSE CONFIDENTIAL. If you would like to do some articles for Rose Speaks.com send us that information and we will give you our rules for guest writers.
The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of Rose Turner or our featured authors, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners. If comments to this or any other articles are not related to the article or does not meet the terms of use for Rose Speaks, they will be removed by the moderators.
As the California Criminal Trial of Howard K. Stern, Dr. Sandeep Kapoor and Khristine Eroshevich looms for August 4, 2010, the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith tightens the noose on four major witnesses.
You have to wonder if this will affect the credibility of Ford Shelley, G. Ben Thompson, Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson as well as attorney Susan Brown. It also appears that Magistrate Judge Thomas E. Rogers III for the South Carolina Federal Court decided to issue this Order without need of a Hearing.
On July 1, 2010 the Court in South Carolina issued an Court Order allowing the addition of Gaither Thompson II, Gina Shelley, Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia. The new defendants have twenty one (21) days to answer the Amended First Complaint so don’t look for this to go to trial before the criminal charges in California is tried to conclusion.
HERE ARE THE HIGH POINTS I FOUND IN THE COURT’S SEVEN (7) PAGE ORDER
“Plaintiff asserts causes of action for conversion, wrongful taking of estate property in violation of California Probate Code § 850, et seq., statutory and common law commercial appropriation of right of publicity in violation of California Civil Code § 3344.1, unjust enrichment/restitution, unfair competition in violation of California Business & Professional Code § 17200, et seq., violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(5) and civil conspiracy.
That the Estate’s property has been distributed to other entities including Geraldo Rivera with Fox News, the O’Quinn Law Firm, former television journalist Rita Cosby, and the California Department of Justice.
Counsel for Ford has consented to the filing of the proposed Amended Complaint. See Email from MacDonald to Lantta dated October 28, 2009. Thompson has not filed a Response in opposition the motion. The only opposition comes from proposed new Defendants Brown and the Law Firm. 1 Brown argues that allowing the amendments would be prejudicial to her and would be futile as to the claims against her. Brown does not appear to oppose the addition of Gaither, Melanie and Gina as Defendants in this action or to the addition of factual allegations regarding Ford’s distribution of Estate property to other third-parties.
[Brown] argues that she would be prejudiced due to the fact that she has not had the opportunity to participate in discovery as a party. However, in his Response, Plaintiff asserts that he is not opposed to amending the deadlines in this case to allow Brown to conduct discovery.
Brown argues that, as former counsel in this case, she is immune from the claims Plaintiff seeks to allege. Generally, an attorney is immune from liability to third persons arising from the performance of his or her professional activities as an attorney on behalf of and with the knowledge of his or her client. See Hunt v. Mortgage Electronic Registration, 522 F. Supp.2d 749, 758 (D.S.C. 2007). However, both Thompson and Ford testify that they did not authorize her to distribute Estate property to the O’Quinn Law. Firm.
The Clerk of Court is directed to file the Amended Complaint, which is attached as an exhibit to Plaintiff’s Motion. Plaintiff must serve the Amended Complaint within 15 days of the date of this Order. Defendants must respond in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Ok after reading the First Amended Complaint I see this is the same exhibit filed with the Court in September 2009, so nothing new here; just has not read it in almost a year.
FILINGS ON JULY 1, 2010 WITH THE SOUTH CAROLINA COURT.
July 1, 2010 Court Order allowing the First Amended Complaint to include Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
July 1, 2010 First Amended Complaint filed by the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
July 1 2010 Exhibit A filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
July 1 2010 Exhibit B filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
July 1 2010 Exhibit C filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
July 1 2010 Exhibit D filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
July 1 2010 Exhibit E filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
July 1 2010 Exhibit F filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
July 1 2010 Exhibit G filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
July 1 2010 Exhibit H filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
July 1 2010 Exhibit I filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
Summons to Serve on Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson
Summons to Serve on Susan M. Brown and the Law Offices of Susan M. Brown
LATEST FILING IN THE TEXAS CASE I have not had time to read any of these papers.
For now we are NOT going to buy these papers due to cost, if it gets traction after the beginning of the Criminal trial or the August 6, 2010 hearing on Stern’s Special Appearance, then we will begin to purchase these papers as well.
Be sure to participate in our MEMBERS ONLY FORUMS, get the most out of the site by learning your way around in the forums where you can safely discuss things you do not want to see copied and pasted on another site.
The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of Rose Turner or our featured authors, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.
Who does the brown hair belong too or as one of our moderators said “Someone got some splaining to do”.
What the Orange County crime scene investigators and the FBI needs is to match is Caucasian head hair, dark brown, fine 5″ long.
In a case that the D.A. office has released ten of thousand of pages a month in a public trial of Casey Anthony, why do they fight to release some of the information to Anthony’s defense team?
The FBI released it to the Casey Anthony defense team ONLY upon request and then not until April 5, 2010.
Report requested on March 17, 2009 from Linda Kenney Baden Esq. file material from the Trace Evidence Unit. This material includes bench notes, computer printouts, and other specific information regarding the case.
The Sheriff’s department submitted seven crime scene investigators hair samples on three different days, under names on two dates and just by numbers on another dates.
The additional hair and other specimens were received on November 25, 2009, December 8, 2009 and December 9, 2009.
The following specimens were submitted under cover of communication dated November 24, 2009 and examined in the Trace Evidence Unit (Hair and Fiber).
Seven crime scene investigators (extensive hair samples)
A Shop Vac Vacuum (Anthony home)
2 Steam Cleaners (Anthony home)
A vacuum cleaner (Anthony home)
And a plastic bag. (Anthony home)
On November 30, 2009 examined by the Trace Unit (Hair and Fiber) Items resubmitted for testing: TEU secondary evidence.
This report states it supplements FBI laboratory reports dated August 1, 2008, August 6, 2008, August 13, 2008, September 12, 2008, October 6, 2008, October 15, 2008, October 21, 2008, November 6, 2008, December 19, 2008, January 27, 2009 and June 25, 2009.
Human hairs with characteristics of apparent decomposition; however, none were found.
The previously reported Caucasian head hair found on specimen is microscopically dissimilar to the head hairs compromising the seven crime scene investigators and it matched none of them.
Crime scene investigators originally found the 5″ of hair and eliminated the seven crime scene investigators Scene was processed on Dec. 11 through Dec. 20. The hair sample was submitted to the FBI on Dec. 13, 2008.
Then there is the canvas laundry bag similar to the one that Caylee Anthony’s remains were in; well the finger prints on that excluded Casey Anthony, George Anthony, Cynthia M. Anthony and Lee A. Anthony. So the fingerprints do not belong to anyone in the Anthony family.
The hair does not belong to Caylee Anthony, Casey Anthony, George Anthony, Cynthia M. Anthony or Lee Anthony. Now they have eliminated all of the crime scene investigators, so who does the hair belong too?
Remember that very important piece of duct tape? The one that was so important to compare hair samples and fingerprints too? Well somewhere between the Orange County Sheriff’s Office crime scene investigators and by the time the FBI had completed the examination that piece of duct tape had been contaminated and so it shows nothing that can be introduced, how convenient is that?
Then you have the reports of Texas Equu Search, stating that on August 28, 2008 and the first part of September 2008 that because of a tropical storm the water where the remains were found was at least waist high to they did not search that area while in Florida.
However, Roy Kronk saw the bag with something white (like a skull) on two days in the middle of August 2008 and after all of that flooding went back on a “hunch” and found the remains on December 11, 2008, so why had the bag not floated a tad with the current of the water? Has Kronk given a sample of his 5” brown hair to be excluded? I am not saying Roy Kronk killed or put Caylee’s body there, I do feel like something with Kronk smells fishy.
This is the danger when cases are tried in the public media of the infotainment world on Nancy Grace, Geraldo and Greta Van Susteren, Fox and Headline News Infotainment.
Can Casey Anthony get a fair trial anywhere in Florida or for that matter in the United States?
I will be adding links of other papers released today added to this article but the hair analysis jumped out at me and I wanted to get this up first.
Be sure to participate in our MEMBERS ONLY FORUMS, get the most out of the site by learning your way around in the forums where you can safely discuss things you do not want to see copied and pasted on another site.
The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of Rose Turner or our featured authors, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.
I have been looking around the web at blogs this weekend and came up with this question. What Polarizes Bloggers on High Profile Cases from Anna Nicole Smith to Haleigh Cummings and Caylee Anthony?
There seems to be few out there with an open mind to follow the legal paperwork, let Google be your friend and make up your own mind of what is the truth for you; or has that been done already?
Whether it is Anna Nicole Smith with the pro Howard K. Stern bloggers on TMZ.com or the Virgie Arthur bloggers on Topix.net, few seem to be open about either side. It has become a hate festival with each side bashing the other and when Court papers come out reading through them and declaring a victory for “their side”…
I have now went out and done the same with bloggers on Haleigh Cummings and Caylee Anthony and found them just as divided and polarized with few bloggers still open to facts. For instance in the Caylee Anthony investigation we now have the 5 inch piece of brown hair found that DNA cannot match it to Caylee Anthony, her mother Casey Anthony, the Anthony family and even the crime scene investigators. I would think this would cause many to back up and take a second look, who does that hair belong to? Added to that you have the FBI lab contaminating the duct tape so any evidence on that is now useless. However with all those new revelations in the past week has any blogger decided to back up and take a second look? If so I cannot find them. They spin it to their side and bash the other side or even those still open minded for being dumb or having an agenda.
Then you have Haleigh Cummings, a case that has been spun out of control by Infotainment “News” as the newest hot story. We see the same players, Greta Van Susteren, Geraldo Rivera and Nancy Grace, each competing for the “bombshell or exclusive only here”, but what they talk about is all over the news by the time they come on at night. So there is neither new evidence, an exclusive and/or a bombshell, only bottom line ratings. We are now seeing lawyers in that case, like the Casey Anthony case; beginning to remove themselves from these cases or have bar complaints and then the defense of the lawyers and not the case becomes the focal point.
In Anthony’s case it is Jose Baez for Casey Anthony being reported by the D. A. with what seems to be ongoing never ending complaints against Jose Baez. In the Cummings case we have a lawyer now saying that because in the beginning things were going so bad that, Kim Picazio the attorney for Haleigh’s mother, Crystal Sheffield, had a media consultant who assisted Crystal Sheffield and the legal team, lending their expertise and advice on the strategic placement and release of information to turn around the negative press Crystal Sheffield was receiving. Crystal Sheffield and Kim Picazio spent a great deal of time with their media consultant. “The release of information, or breaking news, in a high media case, must be preplanned, time-sensitive, and intentional,” said Ms. Picazio. Ms. Kim L. Picazio is out of the Haleigh Cummings case and has been cleared by the Florida State Bar of any wrongdoing.
We have seen a lot of that here at Rose Speaks.com in relations to all cases connected to Anna Nicole Smith and I still find it a phenomenal situation with the new instant news of celebrity or high profile cases on the internet.
In public filings by Ms. Picazio she gives her insight about the lawyer turned media spokesperson for a family member in one of these cases saying; “As the spokesperson for Crystal Sheffield, the release of positive information to the public, whether on the internet, or to other media sources, in furtherance her best interest or desired results. …
…The very nature of the role of a “media spokesperson” is different in kind than most other roles customarily served by an attorney. It requires the disclosure of information customarily thought of as “off limits” to the public and/or your opponents. This job requires more than showing up at media interviews. It requires complex strategy, intelligent calculation, finding and maintaining inside sources for information, and trusted contacts who can be your eyes and ears for the “feel” of the public. Damning information about a client that is swirled around the Internet will surely be aired in national headlines, and can devastate your client’s image, credibility, case or cause. Disclosures of information are aimed at directing, it was imperative that we kept key contacts in law enforcement, the community, the media, as well as on the internet, to properly counter many unflattering stories which could have destroyed Crystal’s credibility and chances of ever having custody of her children. Quite simply, guiding, directing and dodging the release of information from your client’s detractors, is an intensely calculated process in a high media case. The parties were involved in a high media tragedy, and “fault” and “blame” for the disappearance of Haleigh Cummings is still being discussed nationwide. Disclosures of this nature were done in the obvious effort to steer suspicions away from her as a suspect in her daughter’s disappearance, raise her public image, and gain an advantage in the very public custody issues that were being televised each day on the news.”
[These] “cases have created a nationwide obsession, and it continues to be a prime topic in local and national news, and internet crime news sites.”
Ms Picazio goes on to say; “The internet is essentially where a growing number of the general public gets their news every day. I received thousands of emails from the public commenting on the Crystal Sheffield/Haleigh Cummings matter, some of which even told me how to better put on my make-up. The public sent tips, leads, support, well-wishes and sometimes screaming insults, my way.”
Then Ms. Picazio addresses the new phenomena of internet bloggers saying; “… [That both Ms. Picazio and] Crystal Sheffield, have suffered libelous attacks on their reputations by internet bloggers, and avant guard journalists.” [You have to] “always attempt to protect your client from these types of self-serving intruders who would befriend the family, or members of the legal team, only to be secretly feeding a hidden agenda for fame, fortune, or the notoriety. From the inception of the Haleigh Cummings case, scheming bloggers have sought the coveted “inside scoop”, attempting to befriend family members, journalists, and law enforcement officers.”
[Lawyers now] “have to have sophisticated computer equipment installed, and often staff member will “catch” fishing expeditions from bloggers attempting to get an email back from the legal team/spokesperson. Emails are easily edited, and on many occasions, you will catch these schemes as they were being planned in chat rooms dedicated to the Haleigh case.”
… “Insidious bloggers can be devastating to a client in modern-day high media cases.”
Ms Picazio finishes her thoughts on bloggers by saying; “Often fanatical about missing children’s cases, bloggers spend countless hours “sleuthing” information about all people connected to the case, call and write to authorities with rumors for false tips, and try to become personally close with insiders or family members involved in the case. The most coveted information source for a blogger is to obtain insider information directly from a family member in a case. Unfortunately, the Crystal Sheffield/Haleigh Cummings matter is a prime example of the intrusion and disruption caused by modern-day, fanatical bloggers, who go to great lengths for an “inside scoop” in high media cases. The internet and manipulative bloggers was, and remains, a hurdle to contend with in the Haleigh Cummings case by all involved. There have been countless news articles on the subject of the internet frenzy that plagues the Haleigh case and investigators. The Haleigh Cummings case is the most active criminal investigation blogged about on the internet to date, other than the Caylee Anthony matter. Although I was surely not obsessed with blogging, the internet frenzy was a very real fact and hazard that existed in the case.”
I found Ms. Picazio thoughts expressed to the Florida State Bar something to ponder. Is this the new typical “blogger”? As you know we have had bloggers cross state lines to take pictures of our home just because. We have read where bloggers where doing screen shots or even sending things from Rose Speaks.com to lawyers in the Anna Nicole Smith cases only to find out later from the lawyers, they would never use something obtained in that way. So are bloggers the next step in reporting news or are bloggers angry people who take out that anger towards the world behind the safety of a computer screen in these high profile cases? Do we all need to “own our words”?
NEWEST PAPERS FILED IN CASES WE ARE FOLLOWING:
April 26, 2010 Notice of Hearing for the Motion for Continuance set in Harris County for May 7, 2010 at 11:30 A. M.
Be sure to participate in our MEMBERS ONLY FORUMS, get the most out of the site by learning your way around in the forums where you can safely discuss things you do not want to see copied and pasted on another site.
The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of Rose Turner or our featured authors, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.
Eleven months ago we put up this video of Joy Wray, Equusearch volunteer, stating she had search the area where Roy Kronk had said the body was in August before the discovery of Caylee Anthony by Kronk in December 2008. Ms Wray, for the past year has been a lone voice that no one wanted to hear in the district attorney’s office because she said that Caylee Anthony remains were not where Roy Kronk said they were.
Now almost a year later the Orange County Sheriff’s office has decided to talk to her. I guess they missed the video with this article made almost a year ago.
Joy Wray has stated she spent hours looking for Caylee Anthony’s body before Kronk found the remains in December and said she had the video that proves Caylee’s body was not in the woods in November 2008 where Kronk had said it was. If you remember, three of Roy Kronk’s fellow workers said they did not remember Kronk even talking about seeing any remains in August. In fact one of Kronk’s fellow employees said he only remembered the rattle snake they found and that he took it home and put it in the freezer. I have always wondered why his fellow workers remember the rattle snake but don’t remember or, for the most part, was hazy at best about Kronk saying he saw a body in the woods on three different days in August. This was before the tropical storm hit in mid August making those woods impossible to get to for a couple of months by volunteer searcher’s like Tim Miller’s Texas Equusearch.
In a rush to prove Casey Anthony was the murderer of her daughter, because after all a young immature woman who lied had to be a murderer, why did the Orange County DA focus only on Casey Anthony from the beginning? So does that mean if you are young, immature and a compulsive liar, then you must be a murderer? I have always had a hard time swallowing that logic.
That was followed by thousands of doucments released by the Orange County district attorney’s office under the Florida sunshine act. All of these papers went to prove how bad Casey Anthony was and to convict her in the public since it was only a circumstantial case. The infotainment business went ballistic on the story almost handing out the white sheets and the rope, sadly something many of us remember happening in the spring of 2007 on another case we have been following.
We have a whole section of those documents release over the last 1+ years to preserve them after they are taken offline by news papers, etc…
Ms. Wray has always said she had a video that backed up Casey Anthony’s defense team, led by Jose Baez and Andrea Lyon, that showed that Caylee’s remains could not be where Kronk said they were in August 2008. Ms. Wray has maintained her video would prove that someone other than Casey Anthony probably put the remains of Caylee Anthony there after Casey Anthony was in jail.
Yesterday the Orange County Sheriff’s department descended on Ms. Wray’s home with a search warrant to pick up her computer for examination because that is where the video is stored. Let’s hope they don’t accidentally erase the video or the hard drive while examining it. Eleven months later with at least one video “overlooked” and now the Orange County Sheriff’s department wants to interview Ms. Wray… YOU THINK????
The Orange County Sheriff’s department questioned Ms. Wray yesterday as they served the search warrant at her home for her computer. I hope that Casey Anthony’s defense team and private investigator, Mort Smith, makes sure they stay on top of this evidence and not let it slip away as the district attorney’s office and sheriff’s department might shop around for a forensic specialist like they did with Casey’s car when the first forensic specialist to examines the car disagree with what the district attorney’s office wanted to hear, thus they shopped for an expert who would agree with them about the car.
The defense team said Monday they’ve located two additional volunteers whose names did not appear on the list provided by Miller. Both of these individual’s claim they were in the same area where the toddler’s body was found, but did not find Caylee.
One of the volunteers, Laura Buchanan, of New Jersey, submitted a sworn statement that “may provide” ammunition for Casey Anthony’s defense team, per media in Florida
WE HAVE NOW EDITED THE STATEMENT OF LAURA BUCHANAN SINCE ONE OF OUR NEW POSTERS ON THIS CASE, tupelohonny, FOR PROVIDING US WITH A LINK WHERE WE COULD READ THE STATEMENT FOR OURSELVES. By doing this in all of the cases we follow we hope we stick to the facts as they are presented to the Court in flings, and not fall into the “hype, spin or sensationalism” as others who post might want to go. This is why we ONLY cover cases where we can get the actual court papers.
In the statement, Buchanan wrote:
“On September 3, 2008, the team in which I was assigned, [from TES], went to Suburban Street in Orlando and searched the area near where the remins of Caylee Anthony were found.
“We were in that area for approximately 3 to 4 hours. I personally searched near the privacy fence and worked my way towards and then beyond the spot where the body was found”
I did not notice anything unusual. I did not notice a strange smell. I noticed no buzzards, nor unusual animal or insect activity.
It is my opinion that the remains of Caylee Anthony were not there during the time of our search.”
Another volunteer said that Caylee’s body was not found when he searched the same area. This volunteer believes Casey Anthony killed Caylee, but that the family hid Caylee Anthony’s body and put it in the woods later after November 2008. If that proves true then what and why did Kronk called the Orange County Sheriff’s office those three times in August 2008?
Joseph Jordan statement reads, “On September 1, 2008, I and a group of approximately 30 TES volunteers went to the area of Suburban and Hope Springs Streets in Orlando, Florida. We went to that area to search for the remains of Caylee Anthony.
Although I was in the area with over 30 people, only five to six volunteers and I searched the ara by the stockade fence along the south side of Suburban Street near Hope Springs Street. Among the five to six volunteers with me were Danny Ibison and his dog and a Panama City Sheriff’s Deputy with one of his two dogs.”
My question with Mr. Jordan statement about the dogs is were they cadiver dogs? If not what they trained to look for? It is my understanding that trained dogs excel at what they are trained to do, but no where do I see where the two dogs were in fact specialized to hunt for remains of a human.
So who killed Caylee Anthony and why, if this is all true, did Kronk make calls in August 2008 when there are claims that there was no body there to be found?
Pick up a copy of the Motion with the two statements attached in our download section opened to all.
November 23, 2009 Casey Anthony’s legal team filed copy of Motion with Memorandum of law to modify the previous Court Order. Anthony wants the Court to order TES to turn over all material involving the search for Caylee Anthony. The Motions has 2 exhibits from TES’ volunteers that their names were not on the list provided to Anthony by TES. The Motions has two exhibits with it from TES’ volunteer statements that their names were not on the list of names turned over by TES.
If this does not prove that the sensationalized infotainment of Geraldo Rivera, Greta Van Susteren and Nancy Grace, once again being passed as news was the driving force of a conviction in the media, just as they have done to other cases we have been following, then I don’t know what does. When will these infotainment programs have to give a disclaimer as one watches that they are not reliable news sources but infotainment always following that illusive ratings sweep that brings in those advertisement dollars? We can only hope as other forms of media began to call them out on this type of total disregard for what the truth might be, via blogs and online news sites, they or the advertisers will began to insist on a disclaimer.
Why did it take over a year to finally check out all of the leads? Why has the infotainment shows such as Fox “News” and CNN’s Headline News just been allowed to run a muck? Hello, if some of this were real news, don’t you think CNN would have it on their “news” channel instead of the sensational part called Head Line “News” and Nancy Grace?
Stay with Rose Speaks.com as we try to sift through facts vs. infotainment in all of the cases we follow, hopefully continuing to give our readers food for thought and encourage our readers to hunt for the truth themselves even if we disagree.
The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of Rose Turner or our featured authors, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.
New questions that we posed first here on Rose Speaks.com have finally come to light in filings on Thursday, November 19, 2009.
Roy Kronk, an ex-meter reader now, is said to have been very abusive to all three of his ex-wives and used duct tape on at least one of his ex-wives, Jill Kerley.
Kronk began his deposition on Thursday and late that afternoon the Motion, Memorandum of Law and a stunningly large amount of evidence against Kronk was filed by Casey Anthony’s defense team.
We here at Rose Speaks.com have always had questions about Kronk but investigators hang on to the fact that Kronk was “cleared by them and was a hero”. Remember it was Kronk who called 911 three times in August 2008, saying he saw something suspicious in the woods off Suburban Drive. When police did not pick up what is now being said was Kronk allegedly wanting the police to find Caylee’s body in August and when they did not, Kronk went back in December and found the body himself at the same place he said it was in August.
Roy Kronk’s son, Brandon, perhaps dropped the largest and most chilling bombshell against his father. Brandon’s mother said Kronk told Brandon two weeks before Thanksgiving and one month before making what is known as his forth visit to the scene where Caylee’s decomposed body was found, that “he, [Kronk], was going to be a hero on TV,” saying to his son Brandon” I know where Caylee is and I’m going to go get her.”
One of Roy Kronk’s ex-wives, Jill Kerley, who said they divorced after only four months, had the following exchange on a taped interview with Casey’s investigator, Mort Smith, which was released yesterday to the media.
Mort Smith: “When you learned Roy had found Caylee’s remains what went through your mind?”
Jill Kerley: “That he had done it”
Mort Smith: “Meaning?”
Jill Kerley: “He probably was the one who murdered Caylee Anthony or had something to do with it.”
.
Jill Kerly went on to say; “It was abusive — mentally and physically, he beat me up in front of his dad and I had to go the hospital. “The more I think about it, the more my gut tells me he had something to do with it,” Kerley said, “He, [Kronk], duct taped my hands one time.”
Jill Kerley: “He said it was 100 mph duct tape”
Mort Smith: “And how often did he duct tape you?”
Jill Kerley: “On two occasions.”
Crystal Sparks, another of Roy Kronk’s ex-wives, and the mother of Brandon, had this exchange with Casey’s investigator, Mort Smith. “I think there’s a lot of concern for Roy being around young girls. Roy is not heard from. Roy is not seen. Roy is just non-existent in our lives, which is great for us. He made threats. He made constant threats against me. It was not uncommon for him to say ‘I should have killed you when I had the chance.’ I heard that all the time.”
Casey Anthony’s attorneys are clearly trying to connect Kronk to duct tape found at the crime scene with Caylee’s remains. They further indicate in the Motion, Memorandum of Law and other evidence presented to the Court on Thursday, that Roy Kronk, “knew of the location of Caylee Anthony’s remains and indeed may have had possession or control of them in November 2008 Roy Kronk, and not Miss Anthony, is equally likely to be responsible for the death of Caylee Anthony.”
April Applegate Hensley who was 11 at the time her mother lived with Kronk has said he came into her bedroom to watch her undress and made her feel uneasy, in her interview with the investigators. No word yet on what the third ex-wife said, or if that interview was filed with Thursday’s Motion. Other highlights of the Motion filed on Thursday by Casey’s defense team says; “they have evidence Kronk has a possible history of inappropriate behavior with young girls; that he has used duct tape to restrain women and that he has a history of abusing and restraining women”.
David Evans, Kronk’s lawyer said after the first day of deposition with Kronk when asked; “Is there a suggestion that somehow your client is involved in Caylee Anthony’s death? No, no, no, no,” was Evans Answer.
After hearing about the Motion being filed by Anthony’s legal team, Kronk’s attorney David Evans issued a statement:
“Today, the Casey Anthony defense team commenced, but did not complete, the deposition of Roy Kronk in the State v. Casey Anthony case. Shortly after adjourning the deposition, the Anthony defense team filed a Motion, Memorandum of Law, and accompanying materials suggesting that Roy Kronk, the individual who found Caylee Anthony’s remains and repeatedly reported his find to law enforcement agencies, should be considered a suspect in the murder of Caylee Anthony.
Mr. Kronk is a witness, not a suspect. He voluntarily appeared today and truthfully responded to all questions asked by Anthony’s attorney. He has cooperated fully with law enforcement from Day One. He has nothing to hide, and has hidden nothing.
It is the nature of criminal defense to attempt to find someone to blame for a crime other than the person charged. Mr. Kronk has understood from the beginning that the defense might attempt to cast suspicions in his direction–because that’s what defense attorneys do. In their zeal to defend Casey Anthony, defense counsel has filed papers with the Court that are filled with allegations that have no basis in fact and falsely accuse Mr. Kronk of various types of bad behavior.
The State will respond to these papers in due course in the criminal proceedings. As for Mr. Kronk, he vehemently denies the allegations against him and is confident that he will be vindicated. In the meantime, as he stated early on in this case, no good deed goes unpunished.”
Do you agree this is an explosive development in the Caylee Anthony murder case? Do you think the police was too quick to say Kronk was not a suspect but was a hero? Why did Kronk continue to go back to the exact same spot to call police all four times? Is Brandon and what his dad told him going to become a major development in this case? Did obsessive Infotainment News like Nancy Grace, Geraldo Rivera and Greta Van Susteren all for ratings and advertising dollars cause the wrong person to be arrested? Will Roy Kronk show up for the rest of his deposition? Does Roy Kronk in your opinion need to keep a lawyer during depositions and interviews? What are the Las Vegas odds on Kronk going to the same place four times in five months, and find the remains of little Caylee on the fourth visit? Why was Roy Kronk fired?
Rose Speaks.com is in the process of putting up more interviews and documents as they become available and will keep them on the site until after this is over, whoever ends up going to trial. Remember to also visit Rose Speaks You tube channel for videos related to this case.
The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of Rose Turner or our featured authors, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.
Here are the newest papers filed yesterday and today in the federal court for South Carolina adding Gaither Thompson II, Gina and Melodie as family members of Ford Shelley and G. Ben Thompson as defendants replacing the Doe defendants previously listed.
The Estate for Anna Nicole Smith also is adding Susan Brown, one of the family’s attorneys for dissemination of stolen property and not obeying previous court orders. Wonder if there is a State Bar complaint on her in Georgia for what appears could be criminal acts?
I will have an article up later after I have time to read all of the papers.
October 13, 2009 The Fifth Amended Order setting new deadlines for filing Motions, Responses, etc. and setting a new jury trial date.
October 27, 2009 The Estate of Anna Nicole Smith filing a Motion for Leave (permission) to add additional defendants to the existing lawsuit against G. Ben Thompson and Ford Shelley.
October 27, 2009 Exhibit A the Subpoena Duces Tecum issued to Susan Brown in lawsuit of The Estate of Anna Nicole Smith filing a Motion for Leave (permission) to add additional defendants to the existing lawsuit against G. Ben Thompson and Ford Shelley.
October 27, 2009 Exhibit B letter from Luke Lantta to Susan Brown stating that the deposition of Susan Brown would go forward on June 24 and asking if she had received back all of the computer data and other documents she had sent to the O’Quinn Law Firm in lawsuit of The Estate of Anna Nicole Smith filing a Motion for Leave (permission) to add additional defendants to the existing lawsuit against G. Ben Thompson and Ford Shelley.
October 27, 2009 The Estate of Anna Nicole Smith filing a Brief to Support the Motion for Leave (permission) to add additional defendants to the existing lawsuit against G. Ben Thompson and Ford Shelley.
October 27, 2009 Exhibit A Brown’s Memorandum of Law to Support Motion to Quash the Subpoena Duces Tecum in The Estate of Anna Nicole Smith filing a Brief to Support the Motion for Leave (permission) to add additional defendants to the existing lawsuit against G. Ben Thompson and Ford Shelley.
October 27, 2009 Exhibit B Excerpts in the Gaither B. Thompson II Deposition The Estate of Anna Nicole Smith filing a Brief to Support the Motion for Leave (permission) to add additional defendants to the existing lawsuit against G. Ben Thompson and Ford Shelley.
October 27, 2009 Exhibit C, E, F Excerpts in the in Gina Shelley and two different excerpts on Ford Shelley’s Deposition The Estate of Anna Nicole Smith filing a Brief to Support the Motion for Leave (permission) to add additional defendants to the existing lawsuit against G. Ben Thompson and Ford Shelley.
October 27, 2009 Exhibit D Excerpts from Susan Brown’s Deposition The Estate of Anna Nicole Smith filing a Brief to Support the Motion for Leave (permission) to add additional defendants to the existing lawsuit against G. Ben Thompson and Ford Shelley.
October 28, 2009 Proposed First Amended Complaint to be filed when the Court gives Leave (permission) to add additional defendants to the existing lawsuit against G. Ben Thompson and Ford Shelley.
October 28, 2009 Exhibit C the Restraining Order issued against G. Ben Thompson in the Bahamas filed with the Proposed First Amended Complaint to be filed when the Court gives Leave (permission) to add additional defendants to the existing lawsuit against G. Ben Thompson and Ford Shelley.
October 28, 2009 Exhibit F letter from Susan Brown dated September 25, 2009 to Neil McCabe stating that Ben Thompson no longer wanted to be part of the Joint Defense Agreement filed and asking for the hard drives and all other material to be return to her filed with the Proposed First Amended Complaint to be filed when the Court gives Leave (permission) to add additional defendants to the existing lawsuit against G. Ben Thompson and Ford Shelley.
October 28, 2009 Exhibit H emails between Larry Birkhead and Ford Shelley about the Estate’s property filed with the Proposed First Amended Complaint to be filed when the Court gives Leave (permission) to add additional defendants to the existing lawsuit against G. Ben Thompson and Ford Shelley.
October 28, 2009 Emails between Luke Lantta and Susan McDonald where she consented on behalf of her clients for The Estate of Anna Nicole Smith filing a Motion for Leave (permission) to add additional defendants to the existing lawsuit against G. Ben Thompson and Ford Shelley.
The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of Rose Turner or our featured authors, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.
Entries (RSS)