Wednesday, February 18, 2009

Casey Anthony's Diary ... Wow... Just Wow

There was another document release in the Caylee Anthony case and among the documents and photos that were released is a page from a diary that Casey Anthony kept. The entry in the diary is dated June 21st, which is just days after Caylee was last seen by anyone other than her mother, Casey.

Casey wrote on the left hand page "Everyday Is A Brand New Beginning" and "Carpe Diem - Seize The Day". Any speculation out there as to what she meant by those?

The diary entry itself is disturbing, to say the least. (See image. I've enlarged it and lightened it so that it is more readable.) Here is the text of the entry:
-- I have no regrets, just a bit worried. I just want for everything to work out okay. I completely trust my own judgement & know that I made the right decision. I just hope that the end justifies the means. I just want to know what the future will hold for me. I guess I will soon see

-- This is the happiest that I have been in a very long time.
I hope that my happiness will continue to grow

-- I've made new friends that I really like. I've surrounded myself with good people -- I am finally happy. Let's just hope that it doesn't change.
I have to wonder how many other diary entries there are in that book that were written between June 15th and July 16th. How can the defense explain this away? Casey states in her own words that she has no regrets and wants everything to work out okay. She feels no regrets for the disapearance of her little girl? No regrets for the death of her little girl? She's the happiest she's been in a long time? Really? You've "lost" your child and you're happy, Casey? Why? I just might tune in to Nancy Grace or Greta tonight to see if they have some kind of expert that can explain this diary entry.

The documents were released to the defense this past Friday, then over the weekend there were reports of Casey's attorney, Jose Baez, checking himself into a hospital for stomach problems. Perhaps the stomach problems stemmed from Jose reading through all of the documents and photos that were released this time. The defense released this statement this morning: “The State’s forensic report on duct tape, plastic bags and other items is a one-sided law enforcement-generated report and is biased and speculative. It uses ‘junk science,’ the kind of flawed comparative analysis that the two-year study by National Academy of Sciences released today.” It's interesting that the only thing I've seen from the defense is this one statement that criticizes the forensic testing on the duct tape, plastic bags and "other items". I wonder what they will have to say about Casey's own words.....

I'll be honest, I haven't even started reading the documents themselves. The only thing I've looked at so far are the photos that were included this time. Go check out the photos for yourself on the Olando Sentinal website. They're pretty interesting. (Another media link, WFTV9, has more photos for viewing.)

Off I go now to peruse the pdf's of the rest of the documents. Here's some links for them:
http://www.wftv.com/_blank/18740657/detail.html (18 pages)
http://www.wftv.com/_blank/18740700/detail.html (201 pages)
http://www.wftv.com/_blank/18740668/detail.html (122 pages)
http://www.wftv.com/_blank/18740657/detail.html (75 pages)

Photo Update

Thanks to an anonymous poster/commenter and CNN Prime News, I learned that the image I used above wasn't a "complete" photo. It's apparently been cropped to show more of the book and less of the background. When the cropping happened, they chopped off the upper corner of the book where there is an "03" written.
So, I went hunting and found a more "complete" image of the book. And, yes, there is an "03" in the upper left hand corner of the book. So, was this written in June of 2003? I've also seen some mention by posters on a couple message boards that it looks as though there were pages removed from the book. I can't see it, but apparently some folks do.

If this was written in 2003, what was going on in June of that year? What "decision" did she make in 2003? And why did the investigators photograph that page?

20 comments:

Anonymous said...

in the upper left corner of the diary there is the entry '03 (which is cut off in this image) possibly meaning it was written in 2003. I have noticed that the major news sources don't seem to be reporting this diary. I assume they are trying to verify the timeframe for the diary. There must be something else indicating it was written in '08 otherwise it would be a boo boo on the investigator's part.

Anakerie said...

I just heard mention of the "03" in the corner on CNN Prime News. I agree with you that there must be something elsewhere in that diary that made the investigators focus on that page. I still have to wonder if Casey wrote more in that diary, particularly between June 15/16 and July 16.

Anonymous said...

It's a big chance that the page on the left was written in 2003 - however she could have written the page on the right in 2008. I have random journals and diary's that I have started (never finished) or picked up a year or two later and wrote another entry. Also, there could be pages missing in between the left page. I have ripped out pages that I didn't want and tossed them out - but left the pages I wanted. So - therefore, I could have two pages next to each other that are months or years apart - from the actual time of writing them. Just a thought....because it's what I have done.

Anonymous said...

One more thing - maybe she wrote that year down on purpose so it wouldn't appear to have been written around Caylee's being missing -

Anakerie said...

You make some good points, Anonymous! Now I really want to know what else is in that book.. Like what is on the next page!

katfish said...

I haven't had a chance to go through this stuff yet or go on any forums...just starting. My first thought was...Casey wasn't home after June 16 (well...that we know of)other than the 24th with the gas cans. Where was this diary? Is this yet another thing removed from her car that wasn't turned over? But if so, why not trash it??? (insert katfish looking puzzled)

Anakerie said...

I'm sort of scanning through the pdf files trying to find this diary in any of the lists... So far, no luck. I, too, want to know where the thing was taken from. The car? The house? The stuff that was picked up at Tone's?

If anyone else spots where this book was taken from, please post! I'm definitely curious about it... :D

Liz said...

Hi Anakerie

I don't follow the case in detail - but I think it an absolute stretch to say this was written in other than 2003 - could have been a new school - or similar - that brought about the comments

The cropping, by whoever, to remove the date, seems somewhat suspect.

I see little doubt in what happened to Caylee, but I do see doubt in thinking this was written after she went missing.

Anonymous said...

Casey's diary could mean anything. There are no specifics in Casey's writing on your blog. She doesn't write that she's happy she killed her daughter. She doesn't write that she's happy she has killed Caylee. You are injecting your own suppositions into very general writing in Casey's diary.

Anonymous said...

or maybe she wrote 03 on purpose to throw everyone off, it is a good cover up.

Stephie said...

It looks like this page & entry was written in 2003 so the state should not have photographed or released this. It has nothing to do with anything.

I have seen this many times and though OMG this is it! Thinking it was written in 2008. It just annoys me that this is even "out there" for us to see, if it was written in 2003. It certainly isn't 2008 if she wrote '03 which of course means 2003,

Anakerie said...

Hi Stephie,
I've had my doubts about the diary as well. But I think I remember reading in one of the many pieces of discovery that the book these pages were written in wasn't even available for sale back in "2003"... I guess we'll have to wait and see if the prosecution uses the diary and how they "date" the entry we're seeing in that image.

WingedTurtlePhoto said...

Funny thing about this diary entry being in 2003... this particular diary was not sold in 2003. It didn't come onto the market until 2004. So there's absolutely NO way it was written in 2003.

Anonymous said...

Winged Turtle,

How do you know this particular diary was not sold until 2004?

Anakerie said...

I don't know if WingedTurtlePhoto is going to come back to answer your question, but I remember seeing information about that diary/book in one of the discovery documents that was posted on one of the Orlando news sites. I don't remember which one I saw it, and the links are gone with the InSessions Message Board. The Hinky Meter blog has a searchable database of most of the discovery.. That particular document might be there:
http://www.thehinkymeter.com/casey-anthony-murder-trial/searchable-discovery/

Anonymous said...

The FBI released a report saying this diary wasnt on the market until 2004. Found it on Wikipedia.

Anonymous said...

If this was written in June of 2003 then she was pregnant at the time so of course she would be worried and would be wondering what the future holds. Maybe she was planning an abortion and was reflecting on the decision to keep the child which would be born soon. I see nothing suspicious about this entry IF it was written in 2003. If it was written after the child disappeared then it might sound strange. I think that if i was the police I wound have had people investigate how long this ink was there to see if was written in 2003 or after the child dissappeared. It would be a HUGE key to that case but its too late now she cant be tried twice.

Anonymous said...

I, too, thought for second that in '03 she might've been pregnant and referring to her decision to keep the baby and so forth. But it was too early for her to have been pregnant w/Caylee. The thing that makes the date hard to be true is that the FBI is saying that the diary hadn't been available til 2004. Could that be wrong?..Is this info accurate? And true: How DID Casey's '03/'08 diary get back to her house if she hadn't been in the home since June 16th? This is where I read that it was seized from. Don't know if that's accurate but if I were Casey I wouldn't have been writing about something like that in a dairy and then keep it once the law was involved. That'd be pretty dumb. And in that case, why write '03 in a diary w/an entry like that and leave it to be found? There'd be no need for that if you were aware of the diary and what it said to put a fake date cuz she could've just gotten rid of it or any incriminating pages. Another mystery to be solved.

Anonymous said...

Well she couldn't have been pregnant in June 2003 with Caylee who was born 8/9/2005, but yeah she might have been pregnant with another child and decided on an abortion. If I have my math correct, wouldn't Casey have been 17 years old in 2003?

Anonymous said...

or she wrote the 03 as to thats how old caylee was