Does Cindy Anthony Expect a Trial to Free Her Daughter?

In late October 2008, Cindy Anthony made statements to the press regarding Caylee Anthony’s suspected location.  Mrs. Anthony’s comments may be found at the following link.

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/17855547/detail.html

Cindy Anthony:  “George and I don’t believe that Caylee in the woods or out there.  We believe someone has her and that she’s alive.”

Mr. Anthony speaks for both herself and her husband.  They do not “believe” which indicates they may not be correct, they offer no proof, and their belief may be questioned by others.

Order is important.  Mrs. Anthony first lists “in the woods” as a possible location where Caylee Anthony might be found, the very location where Caylee Anthony was found in December 2008.  She then adds “or out there”.  Where is “out there”?  If Caylee Anthony is not at home, is she not by definition “out there”?  Is Mrs. Anthony attempting to convey she does not believe Caylee Anthony is missing?

Order is important.  It is more important to Mrs. Anthony she tell the public “someone has her” than the fact she is “alive”.  Mrs. Anthony is more concerned with who may have Caylee Anthony than in her life or death.

Mrs. Anthony twice uses the word “that”.  The first distances her from “in the woods”.  The second distances her from “she’s alive”.  Although sensitivity to and a need to distance from the phrase “in the woods” is understandable of any grandparent contemplating the possible discovery location of the granddaughter they fear murdered, a distancing from a statement she is alive is much less understandable.

Cindy Anthony: “Exact spot?  We’re getting close.  We feel we’re on the right track.  We believe and we have from Day One that Caylee has not stayed in the same place for very long.  We believe that she’s been moved several times.”

Mrs. Anthony states “we” are “getting close” to the “exact spot” where Caylee Anthony is hidden from her family and law enforcement.  She goes on to describe the feelings of “we”.  Who is “we”?  Still “George and I”?  Or does Mrs. Anthony now refer to herself and investigators?

“that Caylee has not stayed in the same place for very long” – Mrs. Anthony distances herself from this statement with the use of “that” and places the responsibility for movement from one location to another on Caylee herself with “has not stayed”.  The language suggests Caylee may be moving herself on purpose instead of being moved or dragged or transported by whoever Mrs. Anthony claims has her.

“We believe that she’s been moved several times” – More distancing with “that”.  Why does Mrs. Anthony “believe” Caylee Anthony has “been moved several times”?  We do not know as she offers no proof and indicates there is none with her use of the word “believe”.  Oddly, Mrs. Anthony changes her language from “has not stayed” to “she’s been moved” which shifts the action to another party.  “Several times” is interesting as it suggests Mrs. Anthony has knowledge of numerous locations where Caylee Anthony was prior to being moved.  Why does Mrs. Anthony feel it important to notify the public Caylee has been in several locations?

Cindy Anthony:  “There’s only one reason why my daughter would keep her mouth shut and why she would sacrifice going to prison the rest of her life – to protect this child.”

“There’s only one reason” – Mrs. Anthony has spoken to the press on a multitude of occasions and typically refuses to assign reasons to any of her daughter’s actions.  Yet, in this instance, she throws out all possible options other than “only one reason”.

“why my daughter would keep her mouth shut and why she would sacrifice going to prison the rest of her life” – The “one reason” is only applicable because both of these conditions have been met.  Casey Anthony is keeping “her mouth shut” and “going to prison the rest of her life”.  Mrs. Anthony sees only one possible outcome to the trial if her daughter refuses to speak in her own defense, “going to prison the rest of her life”.

“sacrifice going to prison the rest of her life” – Mrs. Anthony speaks of a “sacrifice”, but uses the term incorrectly.  “Going to prison the rest of her life” may be the result of a sacrifice, but it is not what Casey Anthony is sacrificing, which is instead her freedom.  To sacrifice “going to prison” would mean Casey Anthony gives up being incarcerated in exchange for not being incarcerated, not much of a sacrifice.

“to protect this child” – Mrs. Anthony assigns a motivation to Casey Anthony’s actions of remaining silent and risking life imprisonment.  Mrs. Anthony does not specify how these actions “protect”.  Caylee Anthony has become “this child”, which is a strange combination as the word “this” brings Cindy Anthony close to “child”, but the phrase itself distances a grandmother from a beloved grandchild.

We have learned Cindy Anthony was referencing “in the woods” as early as October 2008, more than a month before the remains of Caylee Anthony were found “in the woods” near Cindy Anthony’s house.

We have learned Cindy Anthony knows Caylee Anthony’s remains were “moved several times”.

We have learned Cindy Anthony believes her daughter Casey Anthony will spend the rest of her life in prison.

Will Everyone Understand After Jose Baez Finally Speaks?

On the very day Casey Anthony was indicted by a grand jury for the murder of her two-year old daughter, her defense attorney, Jose Baez, spoke to the press.  The remarks of Mr. Baez on October 14, 2008, may be found at the following link.

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/27184822/ns/today-today_people

Jose Baez:  “I sincerely believe that when we have finally spoken, everyone, and I mean everyone, will sit back and say, ‘Now, I understand. That explains it.'”

Mr. Baez makes a statement about understanding, but makes no comment about the innocence of his client.

“I sincerely believe” – Mr. Baez must emphasize the sincerity of his belief by including the extra word “sincerely”.  This brings into question the level of his sincerity as without the extra word, the assumption would have been Mr. Baez believes what he claims to believe.  Now, the listener must question if Mr. Baez believes his own claimed belief.

“that when we have finally spoken” – The word “that” distances Mr. Baez from finally speaking.  “We” distances him further.  The final speaking will not be his alone, but the product of a group, a “we”.  Who is “we”?  This statement was made before Mr. Baez assembled his dream team of defense, so who is he referring to as “we”?  Himself and his client?  The word “finally” indicates there will be speaking by “we” prior to a final statement.

“everyone, and I mean everyone,” – Mr. Baez feels he must clarify who he refers to by “everyone”.  Since his definition is “everyone”, the listener must continue to question the reference as without the clarification, the assumption would have been “everyone” means exactly what it says.  Mr. Baez is indicating he sometimes utilizes the word “everyone” when he truly means a smaller group.

“will sit back” – The words “sit back” indicate and increased tension.  Mr. Baez is extra sensitive about this portion of his statement.  His next words cause him anxiety.

“and say, ‘Now, I understand. That explains it.'” – This is the portion of the statement creating the most stress for Mr. Baez.  This is the portion of the statement Mr. Baez “sincerely believes”.  This is the reaction Mr. Baez claims to expect once he and whoever else to whom he refers “finally” speaks.  Mr. Baez is aware how ridiculous and unbelievable this statement is as he makes it, leading to a flurry of verbal distancing and sensitivity markers.

We have learned Mr. Baez sees a difference between believing and “sincerely” believing.

We have learned Mr. Baez does not believe he alone will be able to deliver a final speech which will cause anyone to understand the actions of Casey Anthony.

We have learned Mr. Baez planned far back in October of 2008 to make many public statements which would not explain any of Ms. Anthony’s actions by his statement no one would understand his media blitz until his final defense statement, which he claims to believe will cause “everyone” to “understand”, but which he does not claim will clear Ms. Anthony or make any of her actions excusable, either legally or morally.