Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Why are they saying "they don't know if its her"?

Everyone knows they found a childs body 1/2 a mile away from the grandparents home. But the investigators are saying We don't know whose they are. Theres no other child missing and it was that close to the home.. i wish they would just prove it already.

Answer Question

Asked by Anonymous at 2:10 PM on Dec. 12, 2008 in Politics & Current Events

Answers (18)
  • These things take time, and they are not allowed to say it is her until they have DNA evidence, or matching dental records, or other undeniable proof, which can take up to 2 weeks.

    Answer by CarolynBarnett at 2:15 PM on Dec. 12, 2008

  • Until they can prove without a shadow of doubt they should keep this whole thing obscure. If they release too much info too soon it will just make more of a case for an appeal due to unfair trial. They will claim that the jury has been prejudiced by the information being leaked.


    Answer by QuinnMae at 2:19 PM on Dec. 12, 2008

  • I'm guessing they have to keep up with the liability, yanno? They can't legally say it's her until they've done DNA checks. As horrible as it sounds, they've said it could be an animal for all they know, they won't be sure until they've done tests.

    Answer by caitxrawks at 2:24 PM on Dec. 12, 2008

  • What do you mean "there's no other child missing"? Have you seen the number of young children missing in the US? Why do you assume these children (if they are dead) must be left near their home?

    Yes, I agree, it is most likely Caylee. But until the DNA tests come back, there is no way to know for sure. The police can't say "it's her" without being 100% certain without ruining their case and the media can't say it without opening themselves to lawsuits.

    Answer by kaycee14 at 2:32 PM on Dec. 12, 2008

  • b/c they don't know if it's her. Yes, there are no other children missing, and yes, the bones were found very close to the grandparents home, and yes, it would be way too much of a coincidence if it weren't her, but - it might not be her. Granted, it's a slim to none chance that it's someone else, but they have to investigate and do DNA and everything to confirm it.

    Answer by tropicalmama at 2:34 PM on Dec. 12, 2008

  • kaycee14 they mean in that area there is no other missing child. come one this close to home it's obvious it's her but for liability issues they can't say they are certain. although they have said that the hairs match that of caylee. until dna is complete they can't rule out the fact that it might not be but really what are the chances it's not her. 0 in my book. casey said she felt caylee was close to home. yeah real close she was.

    Answer by melody77 at 2:38 PM on Dec. 12, 2008

  • kaycee, all the op meant is what the sheriff has said - they have no other missing children from this area. She's not saying there are no kids missing from anywhere. They are doing testing, b/c they know there is a possibility that it's a child from somewhere else. It's just that since there are no other children missing from this area, the biggest possibility is that it is Caylee.

    Answer by Anonymous at 2:39 PM on Dec. 12, 2008

  • there must be hair left on the skull and some fatty tissue so i hope they can rule out what happened as an accident.

    Answer by melody77 at 2:40 PM on Dec. 12, 2008

  • It takes time. There needs to be proof it's her remains for anything to hold in court anyways.

    Answer by ReneeK3 at 3:13 PM on Dec. 12, 2008

  • They cant just ASSUME it is her. it most likely is, but they have to run tests etc to confirm before they say anything. what if it was a skeleton from a very very long time ago? you never know. it more than likely is hers though unfortunately.

    Answer by KelsoBabeyy at 4:27 PM on Dec. 12, 2008

Join CafeMom now to contribute your answer and become part of our community. It's free and takes just a minute.