How Many Investigators Does Linda Kenney Baden Believe are Employed to Convict Casey Anthony?

28 Oct

This article is the third in our series examining the Facebook statement of Linda Kenney Baden regarding her recent withdrawal from the defense team of Casey Anthony.

Ms. Baden’s statement may be found in the comments of the following linked article.

https://bullstopper.wordpress.com/2010/10/23/is-jose-baez-frightened-of-spicy-peanuts/

“As you know The State’s Attorney has hundreds of attorneys and investigators, millions of dollars and unlimited access to untold State and Federal resources: all trying to find evidence to convict Casey Anthony. They have also employed dozens of investigators and many different forensic labs to try and find what they call ‘scientific evidence’ against Casey.”

“As you know” – Ms. Baden begins this paragraph with an attempt to convince the reader they already “know” and, therefore, accept her upcoming statement as true.

“The State’s Attorney has hundreds of attorneys and investigators” – Although true, this statement is misleading.  How does the number of “attorneys and investigators” employed by the State have any bearing on this case?  How many of the “hundreds of attorneys and investigators” have made a contribution to this case?  The prosecution witness list tells the real story.  The number of attorneys and investigators employed by the State to work on this case does not number in the hundreds.

“millions of dollars” – Money is important to Ms. Baden.  We saw in the analysis of her first paragraph of this statement, Ms. Baden claimed economic concerns over her personal expenses as the number one reason she was leaving the defense team.  But how many dollars has the State spent on this particular case?  More importantly, how many dollars more has the State spent on this particular case compared to any other capital murder case?

“and unlimited access to untold State and Federal resources” – The State has unrestricted access to “untold State and Federal resources”.  Ms. Baden is vague and unspecific in her claim.  She is not even sure such resources exist as they are “untold”.  Of course, we know all discovery must be turned over to the defense, most of which is also subject to the Sunshine laws.  Therefore, findings from all resources are told, meaning all resources are told, no resources remain “untold”.  “Unlimited access” implies the access by the defense to the same resources is limited, yet the defense has all the same findings and the ability to conduct their own depositions of personnel.

“all trying to find evidence to convict Casey Anthony” – This is the claim Ms. Baden attempted to convince her readers they already knew.  “All” includes “hundreds of attorneys and investigators, millions of dollars and unlimited access”, “all” of which are trying to “find evidence” for the purpose of convicting Casey Anthony.  Is the purpose of the investigators and resources to convict Casey Anthony, or are they trying to “find evidence” of what happened to Caylee Anthony?  Should money spent investigating a crime be counted as funds spent to “convict” an individual suspect?  Should the money and time spent by “attorneys and investigators” discrediting the lies of Casey Anthony be counted as resources expended to “convict Casey Anthony”?  Wasn’t it Ms. Anthony who filed a police report on July 15, 2008 requesting the State begin immediate expenditures in an effort to locate her missing daughter?  Should those funds also be counted as part of the efforts of the State “to find evidence to convict Casey Anthony”?

“trying to find evidence” – Ms. Baden implies the State has not found “evidence” to “convict Casey Anthony” despite the unlimited resources expended on this case as they are “trying”, not succeeding.  If the State has not found “evidence” which can convict, why is Ms. Baden concerned about the dollar amount and number of investigators assigned to this case?

“They have also employed dozens of investigators” – We assume “they” refers to the State’s Attorney.  Ms. Baden is sensitive about “investigators” as this is the second time she has named them in the same paragraph, but she has moved from “hundreds” to “dozens”, which is less than “hundreds”.  Ms. Baden is exaggerating the number of investigators, but is unable to remain consistent in her exaggeration.  There is a possibility these “dozens” are distinct from the earlier mentioned “hundreds” because of the use of “also employed”, which would indicate in addition to the “hundreds”.

“and many different forensic labs” – The “also” may apply to the “many different forensic labs” as they were not mentioned earlier.  “Forensic labs” are sensitive to Ms. Baden as seen by the extra words “many different”.  We would assume multiple labs would be “different” labs, but Ms. Baden feels it important to state.  Ms. Baden is an expert in legal forensics and the forensic labs cause her discomfort.

“to try and find what they call ‘scientific evidence’ against Casey” – The State has tried, but not found “what they call ‘scientific evidence’ against Casey”.  Is Ms. Baden stating the State has not found scientific evidence “against Casey”?  No, she is not.  She is saying the State has not found “they call” scientific evidence.  Who is “they”?  The State?  The labs?  The investigators?  The attorneys?  The media?

“to try and find” – The State has tried, but failed.

“what they call ‘scientific evidence’ against Casey” – Ms. Baden draws special attention to ‘scientific evidence’.  The use of quotes indicates Ms. Baden does not believe the “what” is ‘scientific evidence’.

We have learned Ms. Baden is extremely concerned about ‘scientific evidence’.  She attempts to discredit ‘scientific evidence’ by referring to it as “what”.  She attempts to discredit the findings of the investigators and labs by implying the use of multiple of each by the State is in some way nefarious.  She attempts to discredit the State’s Attorney by exaggerating the number of attorneys and investigators it employs.  She attempts to discredit everyone involved with the prosecution by claiming their purpose is solely to convict Casey Anthony, implying they have skewed their individual contributions towards this goal.

We have learned Ms. Baden wishes us to believe the employees of the State, for no personal gain of their own, have cast aside their moral obligations to the truth and to justice in order to convict Casey Anthony.

Advertisements

20 Responses to “How Many Investigators Does Linda Kenney Baden Believe are Employed to Convict Casey Anthony?”

  1. nums24 October 28, 2010 at 11:56 am #

    Positively brilliant!

  2. Venice October 28, 2010 at 12:07 pm #

    So SPOT-ON! All this HOGWASH on how the State has it “out for Casey” is insane and beyond the realm of reality. Any intelligent adult can see this.

  3. remember caylee October 28, 2010 at 1:28 pm #

    Great Article!!! I wish this woman had more morals. How can you spread these subliminal messages of LE and Judicial malice without recompense? I hope her career does a dive. You can represent and defend without all of the non-sense that has taken place intended to tear down the very foundation of our GREAT COUNTRY and FREEDOM. Let’s please remember Caylee was an american and the Prosecution is her ONLY voice at this time. PS Casey is not the victim!

  4. pammi October 28, 2010 at 1:33 pm #

    Ms. Baden also failed to mention all the taxpayer’s money the state has given to Casey Anthony to pay for her defense, I believe we can “truthfully” say thousands, am I correct. Amazing how she left that little tidbit out, WOW!

  5. ilmcvm October 28, 2010 at 6:41 pm #

    This was by far the “Best” article I’ve read in the years of following this case.
    Outstanding! Thank you.

  6. Venice October 28, 2010 at 7:28 pm #

    The Bull ROCKS!! and it is all nothing but the truth.

  7. colin October 28, 2010 at 9:55 pm #

    BullStopper,have you ever been with law enforcement? I find statement analysis very interesting and I believe investigators use it as a tool when questioning people. I would believe it could be helpful especially if they are questioning someone who won’t submit to a polygraph.

  8. Brad 'shopping cart' Conway October 29, 2010 at 12:56 am #

    Give’em hell Bull!

  9. sandra October 29, 2010 at 3:44 am #

    zanny did it,no jessie,no roy kronk,no my dad,no my brother, no amy,s the zanny, no whoever was watching her is the zanny,but no zannyhas a real discription according to casey. so boso who really did this? oh yeah she,s not dead so says spindy. someone else put her there,even though the body was underwater and plant growth.but she,s still alive. we creamted the body had a service for her but she,s still alive.nice family,burn someones remains,have a service,even though you think i,m still live.doesnt everyone do this?

  10. Venice October 29, 2010 at 2:09 pm #

    WOW….look at that stone-face sociopath Casey!! She is another Diane Downs!!!

  11. Venice October 29, 2010 at 3:43 pm #

    I believe it is sinking in now for Casey!! She’s DONE FOR! Too bad her pathetic lawyer did not have her best interests at heart….it’s called a plea deal.

  12. niecey456 October 29, 2010 at 4:13 pm #

    Hey Mr. Stopper! Great post! As usual. Did you watch today’s hearing? I would love to get your take on it.

  13. niecey456 October 30, 2010 at 2:50 pm #

    Mr. Stopper, I found the mother load on the pressers.
    Here is the one that happened when Casey was arrested for the checks at her house, in August 2008:
    http://www.wesh.com/video/17342322/detail.html

    Do you want me to leave them all here?

  14. niecey456 October 30, 2010 at 3:13 pm #

    Presser at the crime scene:

  15. niecey456 October 30, 2010 at 3:16 pm #

    The day before Caylee’s remains were found:

  16. niecey456 October 30, 2010 at 3:18 pm #

    Day of indictment:

  17. niecey456 October 30, 2010 at 3:51 pm #

    There are so many, all the way back to July of 2008. He also did one before the memorial to rebut her parents.
    http://www.wftv.com/video/18675729/index.html

  18. bullstopper October 30, 2010 at 4:07 pm #

    Just shows what a liar he is.

    But what does he define as a press conference?

    I say if he talks to the press, as the attorney in charge of his client’s public statements, it’s a press conference.

  19. niecey456 October 30, 2010 at 4:14 pm #

    I know. Right? Especially when he calls the media together to read a statement, make a statement, and/or answer questions, whine, complain, and/or make accusations. He’s done it from the very beginning. Her privacy? I think JP addressed him well. So did JS: “The irony is indeed rich”. I’m not sure Mr. Baez knows what it means to be honest.

  20. niecey456 October 30, 2010 at 4:17 pm #

    Everything I’ve found, and I’ve found much more than this, was a called press conference, by definition. The only one he didn’t call was the one after she was arrested at her house, but he consented to speak to the media in rebuttal.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: