cindy’s hand-sanitizer scare? true?
The testimony of Cindy Anthony was not a bombshell, or a major development despite the news outlets using it as such. It was simply a replay of the conniving Cindy Anthony we had previously come to know.
I was very surprised at Cindy’s about-face today. I think the State of Florida was, too. But, there is no way that Cindy will get away with this for long – the state still has a rebuttal case to put on.
What Cindy Anthony fails to realize is that her testimony today can be verified. She will continue to be impeached and this will only hurt her daughter, not help her!
Although Cindy’s work records verify she was at work the day of the computer searches, she said she remembers not working those days. Huh? I don’t remember the days I take off of work, especially not three years ago! Do you?
The State of Florida and Law Enforcement will be able to verify what Cindy said today; I have no doubt they will.
Cindy said she remembers searching the computer for a bunch of things. One reason she searched that particular day? Because a colleague at work emailed her about dangerous issues resulting hand-sanitizers and children.
Cindy called it a “hand-sanitizer scare.”
I ran a quick search for “hand sanitizer scare” and found nothing about a scare in 2008.
Cindy also claimed she searched for Chlorophyll on the very day because of concern for her little Yorkie eating bamboo leaves. And she looked up “neck-breaking” because a friend was in a terrible car accident.
Do these kind of elaborate lies sound familiar? The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree, does it?
Cindy’s Hand-Sanitizer Scare
The issues with “hand-sanitizers” Cindy said was a “scare” in March 2008. A New York Times article, on March 21, 2006, says otherwise. Here is the link: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/21/health/21cons.html
A Chicago Times article, on May 22, 2007, discusses the possibilities of getting “drunk” from them: http://featuresblogs.chicagotribune.com/features_julieshealthclub/2007/05/getting_drunk_o.html
An ABC News article from May 23, 2006, discusses that hand-sanitizers are no subsitute for water: http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=1993859
ParentDish, on June 26, 2007, discusses how hand-sanitizers can poison children: http://www.parentdish.com/2007/06/26/hand-sanitizer-can-poison-your-children/
Google Search for Hand Sanitizer Scare shows no news in 2008. Click here
I truly don’t think that Cindy did anything to hurt the State’s case today. In fact, I think her lies were helpful for a couple of reasons.
- …Reminded the jury of additional details regarding computer searches, such as the “MySpace” hits which were interspersed with the “how to make chloroform” hits/searches.
- …Pointed out that she didn’t know about or use MySpace at that time. But there were only seconds between the MySpace hits and the “how to make chloroform” hits/searches.
- …proved she is unreasonable. No one could possibly remember their computer searches from three years ago, much less pinpoint those searches to a specific day!
- …Showed the jury she was stretching the truth when Linda Drane-Burdick impeached her, asking if her memory is better now that she’s changed medication. We all know medication doesn’t IMPROVE your memory
On the stand today, Cindy was overly long-winded, indicating to me that she was exaggerating. When cross examined, she was not nearly as clear and changed her testimony by referring to “possibilities,” while trying very hard to fill in details that were ridiculous, i.e. remembering the day and time of computer searches made three years ago.
This is beyond the boundary of reason
When Ms. Burdick asked, “Did you look up the word “inhalation?” Cindy said, “Yes.” And she went on to add other “household items like alcohol” and other toxic chemicals that she confirmed searching for.
Cindy is trying to save her daughter, but at the expense of justice for her beloved granddaughter.
Justice is only found via a search for the truth….
Today’s Testimony Notes
There were other wins for the State today. FBI Hair Specialist, Stephen Shaw, did a great job for the State of Florida in explaining how to recognize Post-Mortem Hair Banding on a strand of hair.
The defense dug their own grave by calling Stephen Shaw. He was very strong for the State. Even stronger today then when he originally testified for the State.
There were other witnesses, too. Dr. Barry Logan, a forensic toxicologist (who is also a wanna-be analytic chemist), testified for the defense, though only allowed to testify about toxicology.
What Dr. Logan really wanted to do, however, was to disprove Dr. Arpad Vass’ findings.
Dr. Vass, you may remember, is the charismatic researcher from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory who testified about the compounds from the trunk of Casey Anthony’s car – decomposition; and the very high levels of chloroform.
In short, the defense would really like Dr. Vass’ testimony to go away, but Dr. Logan was not allowed to discuss the type of testing Dr. Vass does!
To tell you the truth, the defense appears to be in a cloud, or a fog.
They put on evidence that’s like a sling-shot, ricocheting back at them. It’s bizarre!
They’re just prolonging the inevitable outcome of this case.