Casey Anthony NOT GUILTY & Sentencing Thread 6

[rie'smom]

And juries ALWAYS get it right?

Am I missing words? Nowhere did I see where the poster that I quoted nor in my post was there anything about the jury getting it right or wrong.

 

[horseshowmom]

Woah!

What about the constitution do you think needs to be changed?

That's not what they said. They said that needed changes had been made to the Constitution in the past.

 

[denisem]

Took a leave of absence, checking in.

Am I going to have to take an empty suitcase to WDW next month?

Gosh, I'm just beside myself here with excitement. Deep breaths.

Per DH: [FONT=&quot]Oh my god, can you imagine her at WDW? When can we go???!

[/FONT]

So happy for you! I forsee many trips to WDW for this child!


KURBY! Give us the latest on Nicole?

 

[Kurby]

Took a leave of absence, checking in.



So happy for you! I forsee many trips to WDW for this child!


KURBY! Give us the latest on Nicole?

she's doing well - no real change. the dr said it might be sometime next week that she can come home : was hoping that they'd have stepped her down sooner but they are taking it really slowly

 

[mickeyboat]

That's not what they said. They said that needed changes had been made to the Constitution in the past.

I apologize if I misunderstood, but I guess I don't understand how her comment applies to the discussion.

 

[joviroxx]

Am I missing words? Nowhere did I see where the poster that I quoted nor in my post was there anything about the jury getting it right or wrong.

You stated:

Apparently, they deliberated and those jurors looked more closely and decided that voting not guilty was their best choice

All I asked you, and maybe I can reword it.. Do you think that juries always get it right? Just asking your opinion. I never claimed you stated the jury was right or wrong, that's why I asked.. Wasn't a personal attack....

 

[rie'smom]

Woah!

What about the constitution do you think needs to be changed?

The 6th amendment- I guess if people think someone is guilty, they should just hang them or give them a lethal injection-who needs a trial? Maybe we could add something abut having the sentence carried out in a public square and have it televised.
Or maybe change the part about having an impartial jury-only people who automatically think the defendant is guilty before trial are allowed to serve. Then they can have voting booths set up and let people decide on the death penalty.

 

[Nancy]

I never said they were backed up. I don't think they were and I don't think that Baez had any good faith intention to back them up. I actually wonder if sanctions might be appropriate.

That being said, it was the jury's job to determine the credibility of the witnesses. Apparently they did not feel he was credible. The following excerpt is from the jury instructions:

"WEIGHING 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.

You should consider how the witnesses acted, as well as what they said. Some things you should consider are:

1. Did the witness seem to have an opportunity to see and know the things about which the witness testified? yes, he was pretty much defending himself against the DT's lies.

2. Did the witness seem to have an accurate memory? yes

3. Was the witness honest and straightforward in answering the attorneys' questions? yes even in the face of Baez's attempt to get him to explode.

4. Did the witness have some interest in how the case should be decided? I would say yes because it was his daughter on trial and his grand daughter that was killed, so why wouldn't he be interested in the

5. Does the witness' testimony agree with the other testimony and other evidence in the case? yes, unless you think he didn't agree with himself being an abuser

6. Has the witness been offered or received any money, preferred treatment or other benefit in order to get the witness to testify? no

7. Had any pressure or threat been used against the witness that affected the truth of the witness' testimony? no

8. Did the witness at some other time make a statement that is inconsistent with the testimony he or she gave in court? no

You may rely upon your own conclusion about the witness. A juror may believe or disbelieve all or any part of the evidence or the testimony of any witness."

Many of these considerations are so subjective that it is understandable that two people could easily disagree about whether someone was credible or not.

they believed he was not credible because they believed the liars story and they put George on trial.

Casey should be begging to stay in jail! Bodyguards, shmaudyguards, I think He's coming for her.

LOL.

OMG! IT'S A GIRL!! I'M GOING TO HAVE A GRANDDAUGHTER!!

Congratulations grandma!

OMG Mare, do I have the store for YOU!

Of course there will have to be a Princess Breakfast at the castle - you'd better start calling now! And when she's three you can take her to the Bibbidi Bobbidi Boutique!

I was going on one night about how I thought BBB was a waste and why would parents choose to spend money to do that to their daughters and my 3 daughters all informed me that they wish that was around when they were little cause they think it is awesome. I guess if it was around then I probably would have spent the money on it LOL.

Woah!

What about the constitution do you think needs to be changed?

Ummm....no where did she say there was something wrong with it. She said there are amendments to the original constitution so over time people thought it needed to be changed. I took it to mean that just cause something is the "American way" doesn't mean it can't be changed and made better.

 

[Bella the Ball 360]

Just think about the chances that lightning would strike that tree, today! there is a lot of energy at that site. It's just amazing. Whether you believe in signs or God or karma, there is something there. Very cool!

She is also being released on 13th which could also be considered an omen.

BTW she will be in jail 1042 days and Caylee was alive 1043 days there must be some sort of sign in that.

 

[joviroxx]

I never said they were backed up. I don't think they were and I don't think that Baez had any good faith intention to back them up. I actually wonder if sanctions might be appropriate.

That being said, it was the jury's job to determine the credibility of the witnesses. Apparently they did not feel he was credible. The following excerpt is from the jury instructions:

"WEIGHING 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.

You should consider how the witnesses acted, as well as what they said. Some things you should consider are:

1. Did the witness seem to have an opportunity to see and know the things about which the witness testified?

2. Did the witness seem to have an accurate memory?

3. Was the witness honest and straightforward in answering the attorneys' questions?

4. Did the witness have some interest in how the case should be decided?

5. Does the witness' testimony agree with the other testimony and other evidence in the case?

6. Has the witness been offered or received any money, preferred treatment or other benefit in order to get the witness to testify?

7. Had any pressure or threat been used against the witness that affected the truth of the witness' testimony?

8. Did the witness at some other time make a statement that is inconsistent with the testimony he or she gave in court?

You may rely upon your own conclusion about the witness. A juror may believe or disbelieve all or any part of the evidence or the testimony of any witness."

Many of these considerations are so subjective that it is understandable that two people could easily disagree about whether someone was credible or not.

You know what's interesting? They choose to believe Casey's story. A self proclaimed, convicted and known liar, over George.

 

[mickeyboat]

The 6th amendment- I guess if people think someone is guilty, they should just hang them or give them a lethal injection-who needs a trial? Maybe we could add something abut having the sentence carried out in a public square and have it televised.
Or maybe change the part about having an impartial jury-only people who automatically think the defendant is guilty before trial are allowed to serve. Then they can have voting booths set up and let people decide on the death penalty.

Let's not forget the 14th amendment.

 

[joviroxx]

Woah!

What about the constitution do you think needs to be changed?

I know Lisa is perfectly capable of defending herself, but really, is that REALLY what you got from her post?

 

[Bella the Ball 360]

Okay I know this is kind of off topic but the public relations person for the court I think her name is Levy .....darn but she needs some conditioner OR a no frizz product for her hair.

 

[mickeyboat]

You know what's interesting? They choose to believe Casey's story. A self proclaimed, convicted and known liar, over George.

But can you see how determining someone's credibility based on those considerations is so subjective, and how two people can be presented with the same information but conclude completely different conclusions?

 

[Aisling]

Just wanted to say CONGRATULATIONS to Mare!!!!

Sorry to interrupt the discussion flow.

 

[walden]

*He* really wasn't interested in the answers/opinions. *She* was simply asking to be asking. I would never let anonymous posters on a Disney message board sway my opinions on anything. I was simply entertaining myself. This is a "Just for Fun" board.

Perhaps *she* should do some homework before asking uninformed questions and demanding that other people prove their points without doing obvious research for him/herself. Otherwise she/he comes over as quite lazy and quite unnecessarily argumentative.

Yep, it is a *fun* board. But emotions run high on many supposedley "fun" threads and some genuinely heartbreaking stuff gets discussed.

Compassionate posters have a little common sense, and the ability to skip a thread if they just want to argue. I've throttled myself and sat on my fingers on many other threads.

"Entertaining yourself" is not kind. Or sensible. Or productive.

Look at the FIRST POST. And have a very lovely day.

That is all I have to say to you.

 

[mickeyboat]

I know Lisa is perfectly capable of defending herself, but really, is that REALLY what you got from her post?

Please see post # 1665.

 

[Aisling]

Okay I know this is kind of off topic but the public relations person for the court I think her name is Levy .....darn but she needs some conditioner OR a no frizz product for her hair.

I'm so happy I'm not the only superficial woman on this thread!!!

 

[horseshowmom]

You know what's interesting? They chose to believe Casey's story. A self proclaimed, convicted and known liar, over George.

That's what I just can't get past. There was nothing to prove he lied. Even if you want to include the River woman's testimony and think she was being completely honest, that would be one lie compared to a tsunami of lies from Casey. He exhibited open, raw emotion on the stand, and she exhibited disgusting behavior after he child died. The conclusions they reached are unfathomable in my opinion.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Woah!

What about the constitution do you think needs to be changed?

It was tongue in cheek sarcasm to demonstrate a point.

Many think what this jury did was acceptable because they are the jury and we are entitled to a jury by our peers. They feel it is blasphemous to have an issue with what they did.

If we just accepted our constitution as it was originally written...then we would be lacking many basic civil liberties right now.

Questioning on whether or not a system needs to be improved is the American Way.

Accepting our country is fine just the way it is...

That is not what the constitution is all about.

But feel free to draw any conclusions you would like out of what I said--by inferring what I did not mean.