Shortly after Mrs. Anthony’s testimony, Ms. Burdick had investigators contact the employer.
The subpoenaed records were delivered by John Camperlengo, general counsel of Gentiva, the home health care company that employed Mrs. Anthony in March 2008.
Prosecutors sought production of the documents to prove that it was impossible for Cindy Anthony to conduct Google Internet searches on her home computer for chloroform on March 17 and March 21 in the middle of the afternoon because she was at work on both days.
Prosecutors argue that the searches were conducted by Casey when her parents weren’t home. The searches sought information about chloroform and the words “how to make chloroform.”
Computer forensic experts said the searches were conducted between 1:43 p.m. and 1:55 p.m. on March 17 and between 2:16 p.m. and 2:28 p.m. on March 21.
In her June 23 testimony, Mrs. Anthony was asked if she was home from work at those precise times. “It is possible,” she replied, twice.
“Were you, or weren’t you,” Burdick asked.
“If I had access to my work computer I could tell you when I left that day,” she replied.
Documents obtained from Gentiva show that someone was logged in on a Gentiva computer as Cindy Anthony and was updating computerized patient files at Cindy Anthony’s workstation in Winter Park, Fla., from 1:41 p.m. until 2:22 p.m. on March 17, and from 2:22 p.m. to 4:06 p.m. on March 21.
Mr. Camperlengo testified that the records were accurate and that they indicated that Mrs. Anthony was present in the company’s office on those dates and those times.
Mrs. Anthony had justified her “chloroform” search with the explanation that she intended to search for “chlorophyll” and that “chloroform” was suggested as an alternative search. She said she was worried that her dogs were eating bamboo leaves and wanted to learn more about chlorophyll to see if it might make them sick. She also said she was concerned about the use of hand sanitizers around young children like her granddaughter, Caylee.