Casey Anthony NOT GUILTY & Sentencing Thread 6

[ajksmom]

But:
1) Plenty of expert testimony showing how it was there before decomp
And expert testimony contrary to that logic
2) The mandible was held together and found together with the tape on it
3) The mandible is NEVER found attached to the skull therefore testimony that the duct tape was there before decomp and was the reason it was held together
And the super imposed photo of Caylee with duct tape over her mouth and nose that the prosecution entered as evidence doesn't seem to have the correct placement to have kept the mandible in place either. I'm sure neither you or I have ever needed to place tape on anything in that matter but I'm certain if you want me to stop flapping my mandible you would need to wrap not only from the front of my face and around the back of my head but also wrap from under my chin around and over the top of my head.
4) Defense theory was someone picked up the bones, put it all together and THEN placed the tape on it
I watched nearly every minute of testimony and I don't believe they had anyone testify to that - which means it came from the OS, wasn't proved and the jurors weren't to use that to come to their conclusion.
5)expert testimony that the condition of the tape shows it had been there much longer than it would have needed to be if the defense theory was true.
Do you happen to remember who or when that was testified to? I don't remember seeing anyone testify that what remained of the duct tape was definately 6 months old.
6) Defense offered a 2nd theory about using to wrap the body as they Anthony family used to wrap their pets
7) Defense theories contradict each other. Which one is it?
The defense theories weren't proven, but they didn't need to be.
I still can't wrap my head around the fact that people seem to believe that unless the prosecution had a picture of caylee with the tape around her face before she decomposed, its not provable evidence.
They used the super imposed photo to try and give the jurors a visual of what the duct tape looked like. The placement of the tape leaves reasonable doubt that it would have kept the mandible in place, so.....

I would like to see evidence enough to convict Caylee's murderer as much as you.

 

[joviroxx]

I would like to see evidence enough to convict Caylee's murderer as much as you.

\
As per the duct tape after, Dr Spitz stestified to it andIIRC was brought up with Roy Kronk as well because they were claiming he took the body, kept it somewhere and then dumped back before he called LE again.

As for the mandible, the only testimony I remember saying it didn't hold it in place was Dr Spitz. I have to go review, but again, IIRC, The duct tape was the only possible explanation as to why the mandible was still in place aside from the crazy theories from Dr Spitz.

But again, we are just rehashing and go back and forth. Time to jump off the merry-go-around. Everyone is set in their opinions and it is what it is

 

[Mosoh]

I'm ok with not agreeing. It makes the world go 'round.

On the other hand, it seems to me that the mere fact that we don't agree lends a lot of credence to my argument that two people looking at the same information could find reasonable doubt.

So you agree that George knows what happened, or that no matter what time ICA got home and found her daughter missing she should have reported it. You didn't believe anything George said on the stand - includng there was no accidental drowning he was aware of. Plus to put her to death based on the evidence was not warrented - they should have included lesser charges, too? Oh, and the the whole family was covering up an accident. Not to forget that no one really knows who was her caretaker and when she died in whose care?

And believe me, I am not stupid, lazy, in a hurry or in it for the money.

OK

 

[ajksmom]

Exactly. The condition of the tape. Now, was it put on before or after the death? Who knows. But I bet that tape was on that body when she was in the earliest stages of death. Either way, that tape was on there from pretty much the beginning. It was in a detoriated condition, under water etc. And lets face it, if it was an accident, it should not be there. Oh yeah, to cover up the accident and make it look like a murder.

I still can't get passed people thinking that is a possibilty..covering up an accident to make it look like murder.

Kelly

The prosecutions theory was that it was the murder weapon.

I don't think that you have to believe it was an accident if you don't believe the duct tape/chloroform theory.

 

[diznygirl]

There has been more discussion about the evidence after the trial than there was during the trial. And it seems to be a select few. I get the feeling that this is just exercise to flex their debate muscles. They enjoy tormenting people rather than really trying to discuss the "truth" as they claim.

Don't they have anything better to do? A fight on the resort boards, or recipes to share on the budget boards? I suppose the old debates have gotten too predictable.

 

[Samba]

I asked my family what they would do if I fell down the stairs and died. They said they would duct tape me together and stash me in the ratty shed at the back of the property. This seems to be a more common response to accidental death than I realized!

 

[Mosoh]

I asked my family what they would do if I fell down the stairs and died. They said they would duct tape me together and stash me in the ratty shed at the back of the property. These seems to be a more common response to accidental death than I realized!

Crazy huh?

I went out to my sons car and he had a roll of duct tape on the front passenger side floor. I asked him, "what's broken?" He said "nothing, it holds things together and it's water resistant.

The worlds achangin'

 

[richmond282]

My prediction is (unless a vigilante gets to her first) we will hear that George murdered Cindy and Casey and then commited suicide.

 

[ols386]

My prediction is (unless a vigilante gets to her first) we will hear that George murdered Cindy and Casey and then commited suicide.

For some reason, I think George and Cindy and Lee will be ok, if Casey doesn't come back into their lives.

But I do think it's a distinct possibility that "someone" will get Casey. I'm not saying I wish that, but I think it might happen.

 

[usnuzuloose]

Well now that Baez does not have a deal with a book making, movie, or anything else, I wonder what he is thinking now? Where did this all go wrong? This was my meal ticket. Nobody will want him from all of this, the sponsors will loose alot if they promote them. IMHO. I guess we wait and see what happens with Mr. Baez now.

 

[Samba]

Evidently family dysfunction and family traditions cover one for quite a bit of felonious activity these days.

Saved by the Constitution and CMs middle finger!!

 

[mickeyboat]

So you agree that George knows what happened, or that no matter what time ICA got home and found her daughter missing she should have reported it. You didn't believe anything George said on the stand - includng there was no accidental drowning he was aware of. Plus to put her to death based on the evidence was not warrented - they should have included lesser charges, too? Oh, and the the whole family was covering up an accident. Not to forget that no one really knows who was her caretaker and when she died in whose care?


OK

Again. I believe Casey killed her daughter.

My argument is simply that I can see how the jury might have been able to find reasonable doubt.

 

[Samba]

Some jury persons told us how they found reasonable doubt.

My response to their reasoning was still Holy Cow!!

 

[brunette8706]

Okay call me ignorant, but what is the definition of "Reasonable Doubt"?

 

[Brit17]

This is a good look at the problem of sequestration and the effect it has on the jury process.

Yes, it certainly opened my eyes ...

Interesting.

I do wonder why this "group think" was sympathetic the victim

Jury selection was excellent on the part of the defense

Most definitely ...

Great article.

Whether they want to admit it or not, this jury voted with a lot emotion. I personally think they took a liking to Baez and saw him as an underdog. George rubbed them the wrong way. Casey, sitting in front of them, in a lower chair, making her look small and frail, well, she doesn't LOOK like a killer. All these emotional aspects affected them.

For pretty much the entire 3 years murder nagged at me and I felt she killed Caylee by accident. Not a drowning, but she did something that accidently killed her. It wasn't until the opening statements that I realized, no, she killed her on purpose and I continue to believe that. Its difficult , especially as a parent, to believe a mother could do this to her own child.

Yep, they used emotion. They really didn't evaluate the facts. It didn't FEEL right to them so they stopped there. It is what it is....

If I ever serve on a jury, Im wearing high heels. High enough that I can sink them in and no one will pull them out!!

ITA ...

Really enjoyed that article. Thanks for sharing. I don't think there was a single word I disagreed with. The end of the title sums it up perfectly: collective idiocy.

I am also partial to this paragraph:

Moreover, it is most certainly the jury's duty to "connect the dots." The jury is required to consider all of the evidence and to draw the reasonable inferences that evidence suggests. Note I said reasonable - that doesn't mean concocting scenarios out of thin air based on nothing but a lawyer's opening statement.

Yes, this paragraph caught my attention too ...

Someone tell me that Jennifer Ford was not the LEADER of the group. Please....

I'm hoping some checks and balances come into being regarding juries. maybe a professional foreman or a mediator; or just someone in the room that assures the rules are followed like reminding them what can and can't be considered when deliberating.

I have to admit, I am a bit curious to know who the foreperson of the jury was ...

I think this is what so many here are trying to say. Well worth the read.

I think Marcia Clark did a great job summing up everything in her article that I was personally feeling and thinking, yet couldn't quite put into words myself ... it may sound strange, but for some reason, reading her article made me feel a bit better ...

 

[ajksmom]

I think they did that to find out if she did drown. Say it was an accident, we let you go, kind of thing.
LE also went at Cindy during one of her statements given after her "rose colored glasses" had started to fog.
But after a month or two--the pool wouldn't have revealed anything. There was no body in it.
If I understand correctly they would have looked at Caylee's bone marrow for diotomes, if any were found they could then compare them to the diotomes found in the pool water. If not a match they could've then tested the water she was found in to see if that was a match. And could've possibly found no diotomes and therefore the defense theory could've been proven wrong. And wouldn't we all have liked that.
Plus--they were looking for a LIVE child. Can't test the water without a warrant and if they did it would have been inadmissable and the family and Casey denied the accident.
In the statements given by the Anthony family in the months following Caylee's disappearance it was Cindy who first broaches the subject of the pool. She tells LE that the pool ladder was up and the gate open. Wouldn't that be enough to get a search warrant for a water sample? It really doesn't take too long for everyone to *know* they aren't looking for a LIVE child. I don't know if LE were deliberately deceived by the Anthony's, but even LE finally asks Cindy "which is it - either you're telling us she's a murderer or else you still believe her lies" which at that point they had showed her time and time again weren't true.
Weren't we discussing that Casey had rights? Illegal search and seizure--no evidence of a drowning...no reason the courts would have permitted testing of the water, perhaps?All people have rights, but since Cindy mentions something suspicious with the pool and it's her house hence her pool I don't see how that infringes on Casey's rights.

This one test just seems so important. And why wasn't it done...

 

[Mosoh]

Again. I believe Casey killed her daughter.

My argument is simply that I can see how the jury might have been able to find reasonable doubt.

All I'm saying is, using their own words, they didn't do it within the law. That has always been my frustration.

It was a verdict reached dishonestly. I know we have no recourse, but I don't see the point in trying to justify their actions.

 

[JaneBanks]

I have a question for the jury.

If Caylee drowned in the pool, and George "took care" of the body, why wasn't he aware enough to put shorts on that fit but was aware enough to put a pull up on a dead baby?

 

[kidshop]

I would like to see evidence enough to convict Caylee's murderer as much as you.

The jury got to see the actual picture of the skull as it was found at the crime scene with the duct tape. Who knows if they looked at it or not. I just wanted to point out that it wasn't just the presentation that showed the duct tape. And it was under the chin, JA described this in closing.

carry on.

 

[PixieDust32]

Okay call me ignorant, but what is the definition of "Reasonable Doubt"?

Anything can be reasonable doubt. but the job of the jury is to connect the dots, to make senses of the evidence, the behavior, the testimony of the witnesses, everything, but this jury were looking for the perfect evidence, they didn't wanted to do their job, they wanted the state to show them and they would had to say ohh yes, its here. I've seen so many cases where the evidence is even less than in this case, but the jury does their job and they ask questions if they need to, this jury didn't, juror 3 said that they had questions but didn't bother to ask. It seems that they wanted to solve it like if it was en episode of CSI, where they always find the smoking gun and all takes place in minutes or hours. The more they talk, the more stupid they look. Specially juror 3, anyway, they blew it.