The following is just some of Cindy Anthony's answers. When the transcripts are available, a full analysis will be done. These are some of the samples highlighting principle which allows the reader to see that Cindy Anthony perjured herself when testifying about the computer searches and the work day. It is likely that she will face charges due to the serious nature of her lies: her lies undermine premeditation, or the murder one charges. It is not something the State will ignore because she is a mother or a grandmother. A 28 year old male was sentenced to 6 days for a single gesture; Cindy Anthony will likely face far more time due to this perjury of such a serious nature.
Question: Did Cindy Anthony knowingly perjure herself under oath?
Answer: Yes
Objection: Couldn't she simply be mistaken about whether she was home on a day in March, 3 years ago?
Answer: Statement Analysis shows deception. When someone answers a question incorrectly due to mistake or poor memory, deception is not indicated.
Statement Analysis can show whether or not Cindy Anthony testified truthfully. If Cindy Anthony was mistaken, the analysis will not conclude deception.
Question: Were you home on March 17th, 2008 between 1:43 and 1:55pm?
Answer: it is possible
Note that "possible" is a qualifier, reducing commitment to the answer.
Question: Were you home?
Answer: (objection)
Objection overruled.
Question: were you or weren't you?
Answer: it is possible.
Question: Were you home on March 17th, 2008, between 1:43 and 1:55pm?
Cindy Anthony: if those computer entries, then I made them.
Deception detected.
After avoiding a direct answer (sensitivity indicator), Cindy then qualifies her answer by avoiding the question.
The State of Florida challenged her about her work records which would prove that she was at work and not at home on the computer, Cindy countered with:
"I am sure that all those things are lost by now."
Rather than saying "The records are deleted" or anything else, Cindy uses the weakened "I am sure" and stated that the records were "lost" which would indicate misplaced, "by now" given the time frame.
It now appears that the State knew she would perjure and appeared ready.
In 2008, Cindy did not tell the police she googled how to make chloroform.
Cindy denied googling "how to make up chloroform"
Cindy even spelled the word under her deposition.
She now says she looked up chloroform.
"I did not type in "how to make chloroform" then when asked again, asked 3 times,
"I don't recall typing in how to make chloroform"
"but I do recall that there was a pop up showing a you tube skate board skate boarding on rails..." and off she went into a tangent. Avoidance of a question is the same as not answering a question, indicating sensitivity; repeated sensitivity can be concluded as deceptive.
Question: Which profile do you use?
Cindy answered with "we" switching pronouns, from "I" to "we" indicating deception.
Question: Were you on that website 84 times?
Answer: I don't know
Cindy then testified under oath:
"I don't know what my computer does while it is running"
This is to say that the computer did its own searching.
Regarding the things Cindy said she did search upon:
No bamboo searches found in the deleted items.
Gentiva website? No access of Gentiva web site from home.
No searches for dogs and chloroform, only "fleas"
Cindy Anthony should face perjury charges in the near future.
No comments:
Post a Comment