Mother of Missing Toddler Does Not Respond to Offer

September 2nd, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

Casey Anthony, mother of three year old Caylee Anthony, ‘did not respond by Tuesday to an offer that would have given her some protection from prosecution if she told investigators what she knows about her daughter’s disappearance.’

Police fear Caylee is dead, but want to be sure and they wanted to give Casey the opportunity to tell them where the body of her daughter can be found (assuming she knows where it is) without being ‘punished’ for it.

Under the offer, Casey could tell police where the body of her daughter Caylee could be found, and that statement (and others about the whereabouts of her daughter and about what happened to her) could not be used against her.

However, evidence found as a result of the investigation after any possible statements could be used. In other words, investigators offered Casey Anthony limited immunity.

“We really don’t want to discuss our conversations with the state attorney’s office and law enforcement,” Christina Baez a spokeswoman for Casey’s attorney said. “We feel no need to try out case in the media. we’re not going to discuss that.”

The grandmother of the child, meanwhile, still believes Caylee may be alive (and reasonably well). Police disagree, believing the girl to be dead. For them, it is merely a matter of finding the body of the girl.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  1. Gene
    September 8th, 2008 at 19:10
    Reply | Quote | #1

    But what if she cut the body and threw it in a dumper or something and so doesnt know herself where 2 find it.
    Gene, rgn2@op.pl

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.


Warning: is_writable() [function.is-writable]: open_basedir restriction in effect. File(error_log) is not within the allowed path(s): (/home/p6525pol:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php:/tmp) in /home/p6525pol/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 500