I believe that Caylee’s ashes are buried somewhere on the Anthony’s property. Please excuse my previous ignorance about the cadaver dogs. Apparently they were there, they did sense the presence of death.

Cindy just finished saying that she knows 100% where Caylee is, and that she would tell people what she knows this week. To say that, as if she is playing a game with people minds, show me that she probably does know exactly where Caylee is. If she says she was spotted at McDonald’s, I am just going to burst out laughing. She and Casey have done nothing but lead people on wild goose chases.

If She and Casey never told anyone that Caylee was missing for an entire month, and she and Casey are able to coverup and lie about the truth, I wish they both would be forced to take a LIE DETECTOR TEST. This has gone way way too far!!!

I am trying to rationalize. I am trying to look at the common sense side of things. If a mother cared for her child, she would want her near, or if Casey had such an ongoing quarrel with Cindy about her being a bad mother, could Casey have decided to let her mother take Caylee for herself, but in the only way that Casey would do it? Does anyone else see the common sense in what I’m thinking?…or am I just being silly?

What if all those searches are for naught? I believe that the investigators should take a better look at Cindy and George’s property.

Could the answer to finding Caylee be that simple?????

Personally, I hope that Caylee will be found, and that all the loose ends will be tied. Still, no matter if she is found alive or not, Casey will probably remain incoherent, and without real emotion. We all can’t cry for them, especially when there is a strong possibility that they could be deceiving everyone, including themselves….

It’s the lies. If only she was being honest from the beginning. There are too many lies.

bloggernews.net/118360#comment-719168

Well I get the V in LV now. hilarious! yeah, he and G - shit the whole mess of them - can get vicious when they want. makes it hard to believe they are so innocent and peaceful…

You’re right - been looking at Ping maps and making charts of M’s whereabouts.

Cat thought I was talking about another Lake Lee which is an hour away. But the one I’m referring to is off of UCF campus - it across the road from a wooded place that eventually backs up into Jay Blanchard Park. It’s also near former cop boyfriend Rusciano’s apt.

She spent a few hours of nice quiet quality time there on June 17th….

damn it bozo…i could of gone for a walk!

INTERESTING :
cecybeans said,in October 27th, 2008 at 11:53 am

BUT PREACHERS HAVE TO BE CAREFUL SO THEY SOUL DON’T GO TO HELL —- SO IF SHE TELL HIM SOMETHING HE BETTER DO THE RIGHT THANG CUZ HE HAS TO ANSWER TO GOD. SINS OF A PREACHER IS JUST AS BAD IN GOD’S EYES AS MINE ARE.

bump..thinks it was beans that was studying pings yesterday…says there is pings up near lee lake..

cat said it was an hour or so from ants house…and there was dead air time in that area as well as airport…

I’m not sure if clergy visits are recorded - that may be why he was sent.

Mama - agree about LV - he seemed awfully eager to help LE at first, maybe TOO eager…

———-
Confidentiality with clergy is an important part of many people’s religious experience –from the formal Catholic sacrament, to more informal counseling by clergy on such important issues such as marriage and child rearing. Jeffrey from Maryland wrote:

Listening to the episode on confidentiality for lawyers and psychiatrists started me thinking about mandated reporting. I’d love to hear your take on mandated reporting for clergy/pastoral counselors.

But first, I am happy to announce that this podcast is brought to you by Audible.com, the Internet’s leading provider of spoken word entertainment. Get a FREE Audiobook download of your choice when you sign up such as Grammar Girl’s Quick and Dirty Tips to Clean Up Your Writing. Go to audiblepodcast.com/legal today for details.

Back to the issue.

The law recognizes several evidentiary privileges that allow one person to refrain from testifying about communications with another person. For example, spouses can refuse to testify about communications with each other, lawyers can refuse to testify about communications with clients, and clergy members can refuse to testify about communications with communicants, or the parishioner.

The law recognizes these privileges in part because society benefits from open, honest and unfettered communication with certain people. Society benefits when a client discusses his case candidly with the lawyer, and marital relationships are stronger when spouses feel comfortable discussing anything. If we knew that a court could force us to testify against our spouses, then we would not be as honest with our spouses, undermining the fabric of the relationship.

The same logic applies to the clergy-communicant relationship. Society benefits from communicants disclosing everything they have done in order to obtain complete spiritual guidance.

But, as with the psychotherapist and attorney relationships, there are situations in which a clergy member can be forced to speak under threat of contempt of court. As discussed in the previous episode, in some states, a psychotherapist has a duty to break his duty of confidentiality to his patient and report credible and specific threats of violence to law enforcement. An attorney does not have a legal duty to do so, but may do so in some situations without breaking his duty of confidentiality to his client.

As far as my research shows, states generally do not impose on clergy the duty to report credible threats of violence to police. However, where the threat is against a child, or in some domestic violence situations, some states require active reporting.

The law generally does not impose such a duty on clergy because clergy members are trained in spiritual guidance, not mental health. While clergy members might provide counseling that has a therapeutic effect, they simply do not have the same expertise and state-imposed training requirements that psychotherapists do. However, with regard to children and battered spouses, the state has a stronger interest in protecting them due to their position of diminished power and access to police help.

Clergy members do have duties to warn of criminal activity occurring within their ranks. For example, if a parishioner goes to a priest and discloses that another priest molested him, then the priest who learns about the abuse has a duty to report it. This conflicts with a priests duty of confidentiality to the parishioner, and might break vows the priest has to the church, but the priest must report because society has determined that the well-being of the harmed parishioner is more important.

Clergy can also refuse to testify against communicants in some situations. For example, if a man killed his wife, and confesses it to his rabbi, the rabbi can refuse to disclose the information at the murder trial. Most courts have carved out exceptions to this rule in situations where children or domestic violence is involved, or when there is suspicion of repeated or institutional abuse.

A couple sticky issues arise in this area, for example when a person is friends with his clergy member, and discloses something as a friend, but not necessarily seeking spiritual guidance. In that situation, the clergy member can be forced to testify because he was not acting as a clergy member. Another gray area is who exactly is the “holder” of the privilege. In the attorney-client relationship, confidential information generally belongs to the client, and the client chooses when to waive confidentiality and speak. In the clergy-communicant situation, the law is often unclear as to who has the right to disclose the information.

And it’s a good point that the old milk stink wasn’t very noticeable until the trunk lid was opened. If that’s the case how come the garage was permeated with the stench - per what LVick said - when he and M were sitting in the garage the night of June 15????

I still think something stinks about LVick. I don’t feel the way I did about him before. But on the other hand he might be distancing himself from what he knows will be a train wreck whether he had anything to do with it or not.

shit, my daughter left a gallon of milk in trunk for 2 days when we were living in FL and it took me a year to get the smell out of that.

you know, it was never noticeable until you opened the lid - which may explain a lot about M’s car…

I’d better throw something practical in like that or I’ll get tossed off of here for being the anarchist prankster…

CA is GONE - she is like, WTF these folks are SICK!

My favorite one my dad did was he went to a friend’s house who was on vacation and filled his entire bathroom from floor to ceiling with wadded up newspaper. He knew the first thing they’d want to do getting home after a long car ride was pee. That one still cracks me up!

I have not done one evil thing since then, I swear…..

Kris - I would not fret too much about it today. It might be your provider as well - sometimes things screw up with their mailservers being down or slow. My sis and I had a problem for awhile where I was getting hers a week later than she sent them. Give it a day or two and see if others come in from different locations. Ask people to send them to you.

You can always call your provider and say you think you’re having a problem receiving some mail and see what they say.

She was in the john for 3 days and would scream “I’m gonna kill you” when I’d come in the bathroom. I said “you’ll have to catch me first”. She finally did, and threw me in the lake, but then we were friends.

Heck, I’d prolly get arrested if I did that today. My sis was a whiz with “Ex-Lax Brownies”.

BOP - I knew you had more tricks up your sleeve.

Skunkoil on the engine block is good too, only not if it’s a car you drive.

I’ll forward to CJ…

There are just a boatload of babes on this blog!!

I say, the old insulation in the underpants works for that.

Also, 2 drops of Visine in the coffee gives someone a deathly cause of the squirts. they are pretty helpless if they’re on the can for two days….

*cecybeans..I emailed you the pics, but won’t be able to get cj’s from you just yet until I fix my problem here entirely. He is acting genuine on the phone today like he may be able to fix this…I still don’t trust his motives in helping they are always self serving.

But he could hack into her computer remotely if he had the former set up and see any page.

Sometimes at my former job, if we were having computer problems, the tech guys would need to get into our computers and “take over” for awhile from whereever they were located to see for themselves what was wrong. But generally only one person can actually “control” what’s going on. Doesn’t mean he could lurk and watch what she’s doing.

when i was travelling and only had my work laptop I used to use that to get my personal email on my home computer. You just get on your provider’s webpage and can access your home account from any computer with internet.

If he is computer savvy - or they have that software at work, he could easily set it up so he could get into his home computer from work, depending on their network, firewall, etc.