PDA

View Full Version : Casey Anthony trial



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 [45] 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68

DickButtonFan
07-06-2011, 06:15 AM
So... your in my house and fell down my stairs and when I ran to see what happened you had already broken you neck and was dead. I didn't tell anyone for 31 days and acted like nothing happened including getting a tattoo. I taped your mouth shut and use chemicals to make it appear to be kidnapping and let you rot in a trash bag in my trunk for a few days before I dumped your body in a swamp. Then I told a ton of lies to cover more lies...

Psycho? Perhaps....1st degree murderer?

Are you sure?

Yes I'm sure evidence such as trash bags and duct tape point toward homicide, I won't believe the liar woman claiming it's an accident.

Angelskates
07-06-2011, 06:18 AM
No, she is guily of being a shitty mother, but a 1st degree murderer? I would need more proof to kill her for it.

The death penalty wasn't the only option.


So... your in my house and fell down my stairs and when I ran to see what happened you had already broken you neck and was dead. I didn't tell anyone for 31 days and acted like nothing happened including getting a tattoo. I taped your mouth shut and use chemicals to make it appear to be kidnapping and let you rot in a trash bag in my trunk for a few days before I dumped your body in a swamp. Then I told a ton of lies to cover more lies...

Psycho? Perhaps....1st degree murderer?

Are you sure?

Again, 1st degree murder wasn't the only option given to the jury. They chose not to convict on anything but giving false information. Are you ok with that in the above scenario? Because I'm not, not in your hypothetical or Casey's verdict.

Louise
07-06-2011, 06:23 AM
Is anyone else bothered by Nanny Grace's constant referral to Casey Anthony as "Tot Mom"? She might think she's being cute and dismissive of Casey, but it is IMO totally disrespectful to Caylee. Is it SOO bad to say "Caylee's mother"? It gives Caylee an identity. She wasn't a "Tot". Oh well, it is bothering me.

julieann
07-06-2011, 06:29 AM
The death penalty wasn't the only option.



Again, 1st degree murder wasn't the only option given to the jury. They chose not to convict on anything but giving false information. Are you ok with that in the above scenario? Because I'm not, not in your hypothetical or Casey's verdict.



Yes, I'm ok with it. especially when no pathologist could say for certain if she died by accident or homicide. If they aren't willing to say, I wouldn't be either. Why would you convict on anything else? The prosecutors over-reached and didn't meet their burden of proof.

So you would convict me of murder even though their is no evidence other than being a rotten human being? Scary....

Jenna
07-06-2011, 06:39 AM
What????? You wouldn't convict on this evidence? Well, I guess according to you no one has ever committed a crime unless YOU YOURSELF happened to witness it.

All I can say is I hope you never get on a jury if the defendant is guilty.

LOL.

FYI, I have been on a jury before, twice. Both times I voted for guilty. No, they weren't murder trials.

Angelskates
07-06-2011, 06:46 AM
Yes, I'm ok with it. especially when no pathologist could say for certain if she died by accident or homicide. If they aren't willing to say, I wouldn't be either. Why would you convict on anything else? The prosecutors over-reached and didn't meet their burden of proof.

So you would convict me of murder even though their is no evidence other than being a rotten human being? Scary....

You're missing the main point - there were options other than murder given to the jury. Accidents can be caused by neglect or abuse, and both can be considered crimes. It wasn't an accident that she was put into a trash bag. The duct tape wasn't there by accident. Circumstantial evidence is still valid evidence, and there was a lot of it, that IMO pointed to Casey having a part in Caylee's death. Accident or not, she did more than just lie.

julieann
07-06-2011, 07:01 AM
You're missing the main point - there were options other than murder given to the jury. Accidents can be cause by neglect or abuse, and both can be considered crimes. It wasn't an accident that she was put into a trash bag. The duct tape wasn't there by accident.

Putting duct tape on a dead body and putting it in a trash bad is not a crime of murder, abuse or manslaughter; maybe theft or failure to report an accident. If she did in fact die in the swimming pool because she accidentally fell in, anything done to her dead body is not a crime as bad as it sounds. But no one could say for sure what really happened. Except Casey and she had the right not to take the stand.

They didn't prove murder, abuse or manslaughter, they were over zealous in the charges. They should have used her lies against her and charged her with reckless endangerment or the like.

Although living in AZ - no kids who die in pools rarely if ever have their parents see the inside of a jail because of negligence. Maybe Florida is different.

WindSpirit
07-06-2011, 07:03 AM
No need to talk down to me. I wasn't talking down to you. You were refuting anything that wasn't a "white and black" proof. A tape of the actual murder followed by a confession would qualify, no? BTW, I put them together because a tape alone or especially a confession alone would not be enough.


I don't need a video tape, just something more convincing, like DNA. DNA is fairly new (and not always conclusive). Murders and murder convictions, on the other hand, are old as dirt. I wonder what you thought about those before DNA. You only have to go back around 15 years.


I wasn't putting down the entire country's legal system in general, just implying a fact from one particular trial. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one too, because to me it's clear that in this quote:


And to all of the people compaining about the justice system in the United States of America, wake up! We are privileged to have such a democratic and thorough judiciary process. Just ask Amanda Knox. you're implying that the Italian legal system is not democratic and thorough. If that's not putting it down, I don't know what is.


Right. And obviously this would have to be investigated further...you couldn't convict her based on the facts listed. Well, we could argue Caylee committed suicide by putting the tape over her own mouth. We would look foolish by doing so, but then again, some juries might still buy it. You never know.

Btw, what did those of you who didn't think there was enough evidence to convict Casey on any of the charges think about Scott Peterson's case? Wrongly accused, no?

Anyway, I think this pic pretty much sums up what I think about Casey's defense. Professionalism to the end (http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/07/06/article-2011560-0CE1AE6500000578-413_306x423.jpg). Here's the article (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2011560/Casey-Anthony-trial-Not-guilty-verdict.html) the pic is from.

Japanfan
07-06-2011, 07:32 AM
Putting duct tape on a dead body and putting it in a trash bad is not a crime of murder, abuse or manslaughter; maybe theft or failure to report an accident. If she did in fact die in the swimming pool because she accidentally fell in, anything done to her dead body is not a crime as bad as it sounds.


So if she did die in the swimming pool, how does her body get into the trash with duct tape? That makes no sense.

julieann
07-06-2011, 07:47 AM
So if she did die in the swimming pool, how does her body get into the trash with duct tape? That makes no sense.

Obviously someone took her out but that's still not murder, abuse or manslaughter especially if she accidentally fell in. That is what they needed to prove and they failed. Now the attorney has retired, he either already has his own show or he feels like he didn't do a proper job and feels bad about it.

FiveRinger
07-06-2011, 07:57 AM
At this point, I just want to know how the jury came to the not guilty verdicts. I would like to know what evidence they had/didn't think they had to make them find Casey not guilty. I want to know if it's lack of evidence or too much. Or was there a witness (or two or many) that they didn't believe. Or if they voted not guilty because the a suitable option didn't fit.

I refuse to believe that the jury was stupid. There has to be some underlying factor....we just have to wait to hear what it is.

Based on what I know, I believe that Casey did it. But I want to know why the jury didn't think that she did.

Frau Muller
07-06-2011, 08:08 AM
Obviously someone took her out but that's still not murder, abuse or manslaughter especially if she accidentally fell in. That is what they needed to prove and they failed. Now the attorney has retired, he either already has his own show or he feels like he didn't do a proper job and feels bad about it.

I know that this is beside the point but...As a person "of color" (Latina), I could not help but silently cheer Jose Baez when he pointed out "That Laughing Man" during the closing arguments. Anyone "of color" anywhere in the world who has ever been "laughed at" by someone not of color, in a public "power situation" (at a board meeting, in a classroom, etc.) knows what I mean. Also, notice the racial make-up of the defense side of attorneys versus the prosecutions' row of lawyers. Hmmm...and I wonder the racial/ethnic composition of the jury? Hmmmm? Laughing Man did a disservice to the Prosecution when he snickered. The TV cameras did not capture all of the times during the past 6 weeks when the lead prosecuting attorney and/or his Team may have snickered or made other arrogant gestures while Baez spoke. (We don't know; we couldn't see.) Just sayin'. And when that row of beautiful defense attorneys of all ethnic colors stood in a line, in their press conference after the verdict, a little something in me cheered. And when Baez spoke in Spanish to his family...well, I applauded. Muy bien hecho, Senor. Again, this is totally beside the point but...Just Sayin'.

p.s. And of course some power sectors would call the jury "dumb." So typical. Muy bien hecho, Senores y Senoras. Muy bien hecho.

VIETgrlTerifa
07-06-2011, 08:25 AM
While it's often made as a joke, there's a lot of truth to the fact that juries are often composed of people who are too stupid to get out of serving on a jury (no offense meant to those here who have served - one of the reasons I enjoy this board is that the overwhelming majority of its members are intelligent and educated).


I actually don't think that's true. I believe there are a lot of intelligent people (from all walks of life) who serve because they do feel that it's their civic duty or even if they were "too stupid" to get out of it, they would still take it seriously enough and are more or less as smart as the FSU posters posting in this thread.

I served on a jury for a criminal trial and believe me, by the end of it nobody wanted to be there (we had a student, a lawyer, a tv producer, a stay-at-home mother, a teacher, small business owner, etc.) but that didn't stop everyone in the deliberation from discussing the facts over and over and again and getting into constant debate until we were all sure we were comfortable with our decision.

BaileyCatts
07-06-2011, 09:00 AM
I think "NG" refers to Nancy Grace. I didn't realize that Caylee's father had ever been identified.

He hasn't been. The man on Nancy Grace was not Caylee's father. That was Jesse Grund, who thought he was Caylee's father. Casey was dating Jesse and she told Jesse he was the father. Jesse had a paternity test done, since he had only known Casey for 7 months, and it proved he was not the father. But he believed she was his daughter for the first several months of her life. This is what I remember from late 2008 stories.

Gwoofer
07-06-2011, 09:56 AM
Wow, wow, wow. Nobody, including me, has ever said that the American justice system is infallible. It's not. However, comments like "I'm so disgusted with the justice system right now" are simply ignorant to me. The system in place is very fair, with both the prosecution and the defense having equal opportunity to speak and with both sides’ witnesses given ample opportunity to testify. I truly believe there is no better way to conduct a trial than the current system. Let's be real. Has every verdict rendered been a just one? No, humans aren't perfect, they're infallible. Was the verdict rendered today a just one? Nobody will ever know except Casey Anthony herself.

I wasn't putting down the Italian justice system, but there are two KEY differences, one being that the jurors that preceded during the Knox trial were not sequestered, and therefore, were susceptible to public and media opinion, which is, as we all know, very biased and also very influential. Separation of Church and State is another key difference, and is another advantage of the American Government. I don't know if I'd like to be tried in a courtroom where a large, wooden crucifix is the main piece of decor. Sure, it would be nice if the jurors got to leave the courtroom every day like everyone else, but the whole idea of them turning on the TV at night and watching people like Nancy Grace lambast Ms. Anthony for killing her daughter makes me uncomfortable and thankful that during this trial, the jurors were sequestered throughout the entire trial

Getting back to the verdict itself, it is my personal opinion, and I've stated this many times on this thread already, that there was not sufficient evidence for the homicide charge. The manslaughter charge is also a hefty one. It's hard to deny that Anthony was a terrible mother, and evidently, has some severe medical issues, but again, there was just an utter lack of tangible evidence and I can't justify putting someone away without PROOF, JMHO. The one charge she was convicted of providing false information to a law enforcement officer, is black and white. Not much debate there, she failed to report Caylee's absence for 31 days, and was punished for that. Everything else is purely circumstantial.

:encore: I agree with you so very much.

I won't claim to "KNOW" a la Nancy Grace et al whether Casey was guilty of anything more than not behaving in a manner expected of a mother who had lost a child, however, I do know that I personally never have believed her guilty and and I do think that her is one sick family dynamic.

I remember my first impression three years ago when her parent were pretty much the first ones (and the ones you would least expect) to point the finger at her. I don't think this is because they knew her best, IMO that's because they found her (Casey) a burden and were disapproving of her behaviour.

OK, maybe if you think like a normal person you'd say "they had good cause". Well I'm not normal and I would never kill anyone except in self defense.

Most "normal" people can't understand how anyone can behave the way Casey did unless they've studied the psychology of the varying ways people behave when they grieve, fear, panic, what have you.

Regardless, I am surprised but very glad she was not convicted and I hope she doesn't have to spend a single extra day in jail. I also think she's a great candidate for witness protection.