Casey Anthony NOT GUILTY & Sentencing Thread 6

[Metsfan520]

I really like "Belvie". He is speaking about releasing the names of the jurors.

See, I hate that idea. Yes, this jury does seem to have not done their job. But revealing their names serves no purpose. Except no-one will ever want to serve on a jury again. And that will totally be the end of our system of justice.

 

[JaneBanks]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/casey_anth...uilty-verdict-lesser-charge/story?id=14017505

Casey Anthony juror Jennifer Ford believes that prosecutors could have won a guilty verdict if they had brought a lesser charge than first degree murder, which carried the possibility of the death penalty, for the death of 2-year-old Caylee Anthony.

"If they charged her with other things, we probably could have gotten a guilty verdict, absolutely," Ford said today on "Good Morning America." "But not for death, not for first-degree murder. That's a very substantial charge."

I'm really confused. Did they even read the other two options they had that weren't for the DP? I'm assuming they did since they had to mark it as not guilty.

How can you possibly defend these jurors when right there, they IGNORED the LAW!?!?

 

[kidshop]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/casey_anth...uilty-verdict-lesser-charge/story?id=14017505

Casey Anthony juror Jennifer Ford believes that prosecutors could have won a guilty verdict if they had brought a lesser charge than first degree murder, which carried the possibility of the death penalty, for the death of 2-year-old Caylee Anthony.

"If they charged her with other things, we probably could have gotten a guilty verdict, absolutely," Ford said today on "Good Morning America." "But not for death, not for first-degree murder. That's a very substantial charge."

I'm really confused. Did they even read the other two options they had that weren't for the DP? I'm assuming they did since they had to mark it as not guilty.

Maybe the fore-person just asked them about the one charge and marked all the others not guilty for them in the essence of time?

Here is your problem and it is glaring and there is not one thing anyone can do about it. These 12 people did not do their job or understand even the most basic detail of the case they were in charge of. IF they charged her with other things?! It is another sad day. These people really need to stop talking. It is better to be thought a fool and remain quiet, than to speak and remove all doubt. (oh the irony)

 

[joviroxx]

My other favorite:

Ford told "GMA" she thought Casey Anthony's claim that her toddler daughter accidentally drowned and she lied for three years was more believable than the evidence the prosecution presented.

Casey, who they convicted as a liar and is an admitted liar , was more believable

 

[diznygirl]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/casey_anth...uilty-verdict-lesser-charge/story?id=14017505

Casey Anthony juror Jennifer Ford believes that prosecutors could have won a guilty verdict if they had brought a lesser charge than first degree murder, which carried the possibility of the death penalty, for the death of 2-year-old Caylee Anthony.

"If they charged her with other things, we probably could have gotten a guilty verdict, absolutely," Ford said today on "Good Morning America." "But not for death, not for first-degree murder. That's a very substantial charge."

I'm really confused. Did they even read the other two options they had that weren't for the DP? I'm assuming they did since they had to mark it as not guilty.

Rocket scientist, that one.

You understand, I'm not insulting the juror. I'm insulting Rocket Scientists.....

 

[Nancy]

Society will create an even bigger monster.

really....I can't believe a big agency like that would take them on. If I was a client of theirs I would be leaving their agency as soon as I could.

 

[joviroxx]

How can you possibly defend these jurors when right there, they IGNORED the LAW!?!?

You can't!

 

[JaneBanks]

See, I hate that idea. Yes, this jury does seem to have not done their job. But revealing their names serves no purpose. Except no-one will ever want to serve on a jury again. And that will totally be the end of our system of justice.

That would have merit if one of the juror's didn't tell the media that he was holding out for the highest bidder, that an alternate told his story within hours of the verdict and that another juror had a nice paid trip to Disney with her family, (even though she herself had no children to take) for giving an interview.

 

[DianeV]

I agree. Bringing up the first degree murder as the only option (and dealth penalty) really shows that this jury did not understand what they were supposed to do and what their options were

To be honest how can you expect 12 people who are not legal people to totally understand all the charges, etc? Maybe they do need someone to come in as they begin deliberations and explain each charge to them and answer any questions

 

[Mosoh]

My other favorite:



Casey, who they convicted as a liar and is an admitted liar , was more believable

 

[JaneBanks]

You can't!

It's mind boggling.

 

[happygirl]

These jurors keep digging there graves

 

[walden]

Why keep trying? Let him go find it himself if he is really interested.

My thoughts exactly! I actually wrote a response on this question to him earlier today and then self-edited for undue sarcasm.

My memory of the testimony is that during cross and recross of those witnesses it was established clearly that the day they all drove to dinner in Casey's car was in the first week of June. Before Caylee died.

If anyone wants to argue otherwise perhaps they could go to the FIRST POST, follow the link to WESH and put the link to the Raw Video in their post here to prove the point.

 

[Nancy]

It makes no sense. The time she's served was for different crimes. These are new crimes, so it should be a new sentence. Why such leniency?

Those who say that the American system is the best one are only partially right. It's the best one if you are the criminal.

I realize that these laws were put in place to protect the innocent..but more and more they protect the guilty. I have no answers to it.

 

[Mosoh]

I agree. Bringing up the first degree murder as the only option (and dealth penalty) really shows that this jury did not understand what they were supposed to do and what their options were

To be honest how can you expect 12 people who are not legal people to totally understand all the charges, etc? Maybe they do need someone to come in as they begin deliberations and explain each charge to them and answer any questions

Reading comprehension?

 

[mickeyboat]

I will go to my grave never understanding their reasoning.

I think juries may need mediation. Not meant to be an insult---but it seems they need a period of hand holding and walking through the charges and evidence.

I would have held out and demanded it!

They should also be provided with the Case law findings, such as the Supreme Court Ruling on circumstantial evidence.

Jurors are not trained to review and understand case law findings.

This is part of the instruction they were given regarding reviewing the evidence.

"It is up to you to decide what evidence is reliable. You should use your common sense in deciding which is the best evidence, and which evidence should not be relied upon in considering your verdict. You may find some of the evidence not reliable, or less reliable than other evidence."

 

[joviroxx]

I agree. Bringing up the first degree murder as the only option (and dealth penalty) really shows that this jury did not understand what they were supposed to do and what their options were

To be honest how can you expect 12 people who are not legal people to totally understand all the charges, etc? Maybe they do need someone to come in as they begin deliberations and explain each charge to them and answer any questions

They didn't ask any questions... not 1!

 

[cabanafrau]

really....I can't believe a big agency like that would take them on. If I was a client of theirs I would be leaving their agency as soon as I could.

Maybe public sentiment should start beating the drum on some of their biggest name clients to do just that.

 

[Kurby]

See, I hate that idea. Yes, this jury does seem to have not done their job. But revealing their names serves no purpose. Except no-one will ever want to serve on a jury again. And that will totally be the end of our system of justice.

because it's part of the public record.

if they had voted guilty on any of the other counts there wouldn't be an issue but there is an issue because they screwed up (AS ADMITTED BY THE JUROR HERSELF)

and while i don't think it's a smart more to release the names now when so many people are so emotional they are part of the public record and therefore they can't expect their names not to be released at some point in time when all the documents are finally released.

 

[JessicaR]

They didn't ask any questions... not 1!

Exactly and they could have if they werent clear on what they were reading.