Comments on: A Second look at Joseph Jordan http://www.thehinkymeter.com/2009/12/11/a-second-look-at-joseph-jordan/ ...because something's just not right. Sat, 28 Jan 2012 15:01:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Valhall http://www.thehinkymeter.com/2009/12/11/a-second-look-at-joseph-jordan/#comment-16949 Valhall Wed, 17 Mar 2010 19:11:29 +0000 http://www.thehinkymeter.com/?p=994#comment-16949 » TheJBmission said: <blockquote> Hi Val, I’m a little late to join in the discussion. I just found your site and I’m impressed with your insight. I’m hoping you can answer this question. If Roy Kronk found Caylee’s remains in mid-August 2008, why didn’t Tim Miller’s searchers find her remains on September3, 2008.</blockquote> Because by September 1 the remains were from partially to completely submerged in swamp water and completely skeletonized. » TheJBmission said:

Hi Val, I’m a little late to join in the discussion. I just found your site and I’m impressed with your insight. I’m hoping you can answer this question. If Roy Kronk found Caylee’s remains in mid-August 2008, why didn’t Tim Miller’s searchers find her remains on September3, 2008.

Because by September 1 the remains were from partially to completely submerged in swamp water and completely skeletonized.

]]> By: Valhall http://www.thehinkymeter.com/2009/12/11/a-second-look-at-joseph-jordan/#comment-16947 Valhall Wed, 17 Mar 2010 19:08:43 +0000 http://www.thehinkymeter.com/?p=994#comment-16947 JBmission, If you'll do some reading here you'll find "the dogs" are not new news to us, nor are the "32 searchers" that have been discussed by the defense and Mark N. for several months now. JBmission,

If you’ll do some reading here you’ll find “the dogs” are not new news to us, nor are the “32 searchers” that have been discussed by the defense and Mark N. for several months now.

]]> By: TheJBmission http://www.thehinkymeter.com/2009/12/11/a-second-look-at-joseph-jordan/#comment-16942 TheJBmission Wed, 17 Mar 2010 18:48:38 +0000 http://www.thehinkymeter.com/?p=994#comment-16942 As I'm backtracking the outlandish finding of Caylee's remains 11 houses from her home, 5 1/2 months after she "disappeared", I came across this article. http://wdbo.com/localnews/2009/11/casey-anthony-defense-equusear.html This was the last paragraph: Another Equusearch volunteer named Joseph Jordan told the Anthony defense that he searched the area on September 1, 2008 with five to six volunteers and two dogs. He was also not on the list of 32 searchers but didn't comment on whether he noticed anything out of the ordinary. Note: "two dogs"!! This is the first time I've heard of dogs searching the area. Roy Kronk found Caylee initially August 11th, (alone, one man) and six other people and 2 dogs can't find her on September 1st?? This is preposterous! Even if you don't believe Laura Buchanan and Joseph Jordan, what about Tim Miller's 32 signed-up searchers?? They didn't find her either. What do you think is going on? Is someone lying? As I’m backtracking the outlandish finding of Caylee’s remains 11 houses from her home, 5 1/2 months after she “disappeared”, I came across this article.
http://wdbo.com/localnews/2009/11/casey-anthony-defense-equusear.html
This was the last paragraph:
Another Equusearch volunteer named Joseph Jordan told the Anthony defense that he searched the area on September 1, 2008 with five to six volunteers and two dogs. He was also not on the list of 32 searchers but didn’t comment on whether he noticed anything out of the ordinary.
Note: “two dogs”!! This is the first time I’ve heard of dogs searching the area. Roy Kronk found Caylee initially August 11th, (alone, one man) and six other people and 2 dogs can’t find her on September 1st?? This is preposterous!
Even if you don’t believe Laura Buchanan and Joseph Jordan, what about Tim Miller’s 32 signed-up searchers?? They didn’t find her either. What do you think is going on? Is someone lying?

]]> By: TheJBmission http://www.thehinkymeter.com/2009/12/11/a-second-look-at-joseph-jordan/#comment-16935 TheJBmission Wed, 17 Mar 2010 18:12:16 +0000 http://www.thehinkymeter.com/?p=994#comment-16935 Hi Val, I'm a little late to join in the discussion. I just found your site and I'm impressed with your insight. I'm hoping you can answer this question. If Roy Kronk found Caylee's remains in mid-August 2008, why didn't Tim Miller's searchers find her remains on September3, 2008. Hi Val, I’m a little late to join in the discussion. I just found your site and I’m impressed with your insight. I’m hoping you can answer this question. If Roy Kronk found Caylee’s remains in mid-August 2008, why didn’t Tim Miller’s searchers find her remains on September3, 2008.

]]> By: Blink http://www.thehinkymeter.com/2009/12/11/a-second-look-at-joseph-jordan/#comment-2524 Blink Wed, 16 Dec 2009 14:36:50 +0000 http://www.thehinkymeter.com/?p=994#comment-2524 Valhall- You are correct. Joe Jordan created a mess, but essentially for himself. He is also connected to that whole Gale St. John/Wyatt Locke fiasco. Ibison's interview has not been released, but as I covered last week, he has said the area was under water, and so did the unamed deputy. This is part and parcel of what has been going on by the defense since Baez was retained for the non-existant 1400 bucks. Defending your Client by maligning others is the strategy here, it's wrong, and I predict it will backfire. B Valhall-

You are correct. Joe Jordan created a mess, but essentially for himself. He is also connected to that whole Gale St. John/Wyatt Locke fiasco.

Ibison’s interview has not been released, but as I covered last week, he has said the area was under water, and so did the unamed deputy.

This is part and parcel of what has been going on by the defense since Baez was retained for the non-existant 1400 bucks. Defending your Client by maligning others is the strategy here, it’s wrong, and I predict it will backfire.

B

]]> By: William Hill http://www.thehinkymeter.com/2009/12/11/a-second-look-at-joseph-jordan/#comment-2424 William Hill Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:09:50 +0000 http://www.thehinkymeter.com/?p=994#comment-2424 Yes. Or at least I hope so. Yes. Or at least I hope so.

]]> By: Valhall http://www.thehinkymeter.com/2009/12/11/a-second-look-at-joseph-jordan/#comment-2422 Valhall Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:53:34 +0000 http://www.thehinkymeter.com/?p=994#comment-2422 William, We are in violent agreement. I believe that the documents associated with the groups that Joseph Jordan and Laura Buchanan state they searched the area with should be reviewed by the court and any exculpatory (or inculpatory) evidence turned over to the defense and the state if found. I absolutely agree with that. Don't you think that is probably what is going to come of this? I do. William,

We are in violent agreement. I believe that the documents associated with the groups that Joseph Jordan and Laura Buchanan state they searched the area with should be reviewed by the court and any exculpatory (or inculpatory) evidence turned over to the defense and the state if found. I absolutely agree with that.

Don’t you think that is probably what is going to come of this? I do.

]]> By: William Hill http://www.thehinkymeter.com/2009/12/11/a-second-look-at-joseph-jordan/#comment-2421 William Hill Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:49:40 +0000 http://www.thehinkymeter.com/?p=994#comment-2421 The Defense has asked for many things which they will not be granted. I am talking about the thing which will bring as close to a just result here as possible. If there is evidence that Joe was searching with others at this location, then it should be ferreted out in as privacy sensitive manner as possible. And, Yes, I am aware that the State has no obligation to search for exculpatory evidence for the defendant. Still, the question remains whether the Court can create a method of determining these facts which will not invade anyones privacy and I think that the answer is yes. That is all that I am saying. It could be done and it does no harm, so why not do it? The Defense has asked for many things which they will not be granted. I am talking about the thing which will bring as close to a just result here as possible. If there is evidence that Joe was searching with others at this location, then it should be ferreted out in as privacy sensitive manner as possible. And, Yes, I am aware that the State has no obligation to search for exculpatory evidence for the defendant. Still, the question remains whether the Court can create a method of determining these facts which will not invade anyones privacy and I think that the answer is yes. That is all that I am saying. It could be done and it does no harm, so why not do it?

]]> By: Valhall http://www.thehinkymeter.com/2009/12/11/a-second-look-at-joseph-jordan/#comment-2417 Valhall Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:33:16 +0000 http://www.thehinkymeter.com/?p=994#comment-2417 I agree that anyone that THE COURT deems has exculpatory or inculpatory information forfeits their right to privacy in order to fulfill Casey's right to due process. So we're in agreement on anybody THE COURT finds in the TES documents that meet the above conditions. I believe the defense is asking for all the records, right? I agree that anyone that THE COURT deems has exculpatory or inculpatory information forfeits their right to privacy in order to fulfill Casey’s right to due process. So we’re in agreement on anybody THE COURT finds in the TES documents that meet the above conditions.

I believe the defense is asking for all the records, right?

]]> By: William Hill http://www.thehinkymeter.com/2009/12/11/a-second-look-at-joseph-jordan/#comment-2412 William Hill Tue, 15 Dec 2009 16:15:56 +0000 http://www.thehinkymeter.com/?p=994#comment-2412 I thought that I had covered this argument with the fact that the Court could supervise the contacting of these persons by TES. Only the people who came out of that process with having contacted TES would be contacted by the court or the defense. At that point, it is more likely than not that they would have some form of probative evidence to contribute to the case. Nor is it unreasonable for TES to contact these people once more since they willingly gave TES the contact information for exactly this sort of thing originally. I do not see how the right to privacy, assuming that such a right can be truly said to exist in the constitution (which many Supreme Court justices find highly suspect), of these searchers comes into play at all under this scheme. The only time that they are involved with someone other than a TES employee is once it becomes more likely than not that they have probative evidence about the location or absence of Caylee's remains at the dump site. I thought that I had covered this argument with the fact that the Court could supervise the contacting of these persons by TES. Only the people who came out of that process with having contacted TES would be contacted by the court or the defense. At that point, it is more likely than not that they would have some form of probative evidence to contribute to the case. Nor is it unreasonable for TES to contact these people once more since they willingly gave TES the contact information for exactly this sort of thing originally.

I do not see how the right to privacy, assuming that such a right can be truly said to exist in the constitution (which many Supreme Court justices find highly suspect), of these searchers comes into play at all under this scheme. The only time that they are involved with someone other than a TES employee is once it becomes more likely than not that they have probative evidence about the location or absence of Caylee’s remains at the dump site.

]]>