I Know Longer Believe

[Sanchez]

Prove it.

And your whole scenario says nothing and proves nothing. There's no evidence there to provide absolute proof that she's guilty.

Absolute proof is not required. So many seem to feel that an admission or some CSI-type evidence is required to convict. Jurors are permitted to make reasonable inferences from the testimony and use common sense to deduce what happened. Direct evidence is not necessary.

Based on the testimony and evidence, it is reasonable to conclude, beyond a reasonable doubt, that this woman was directly responsible for the death of her daughter. It is difficult to come to any other reasonable conclusion.

 

[CurlyGirl]

Ive seen the guilty verdict applied more because you dislike her as a mom, then whether she committed a crime.

Where are you getting that I dislike her as a mom? Where have I ever wrote that!? I certainly hope you're using the "global you" because I have never said I dislike Casey Anthony. I made that quite clear in one of the CA trial threads.

If you are saying that I dislike CA as a mom, you show me where I've written that!

 

[Mosoh]

I started to multiquote, but it got too long.

The defence did not present any evidence of drowning. They did not have the burden to explain what happened to Caylee. They did plant a seed of reasonable doubt by indicating a possible alternative theory, but they were under no obligation to prove it.

Attorney comments are not evidence that the jurors are allowed to consider.

No they didn't

OS is not evidence and is to be excluded.

George was asked and he denied it. Absolutely no proof. Just a question...do you still beat your dog?

 

[CurlyGirl]

Just a question...do you still beat your dog?

They posed that exact same question on one of the Expert talk shows (maybe HLN) and made an excellent point with it!

 

[sunnyday123]

I'm trying to distance myself from the media now that the trial is over, but I did watch Ashton today on InSession. It was nice not to watch this all day and to just turn it on at 2pm to watch his thoughts on what happened.

I loved how he said to the public that when you believe in the system, you can't just stop believing when things don't go your way. I'm sure over the years, many cases he worked on went his way and those criminals are serving time for the crimes they committed. This is from a person who breathed this case every moment for 3 years.

Right now I'm following a case out of Ludington, MI about a missing 4 month old. Her dad abducted her and the police found him hours at his mothers home and no baby. Just heartbreaking and I hope she is alive. Clothes were found, but police didn't release where or when.

That happened here when my DD was about 6 months old. I remember because they were the same age-born days apart, and they only found her shoes and socks in the middle of a highway and they were little lacy anklets, like my DD had.

They never found her, he never said anything about it, and I believe ( hope ) he's still in jail.

 

[Mosoh]

It wasn't easy for them because they know they are going to get a whole lot of backlash for their decision. It would have been a whole lot easier to convict her - they would have been heroes to the public.

Some people keep repeating this silliness. They claimed to not know the case so how did they now how people who did felt? They were sequestered.

But they took their job seriously and made sure the prosecutor did his job proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. It was their opinion that he didn't. So Casey was acquitted.

As far as not taking evidence into the room ... they had been listening and viewing evidence for 6 weeks. They had been looking for evidence to prove what the prosecutor charged. They did not find it. How could looking at more evidence change their minds? If someone missed something big, don't you think that one of the twelve would have said "hey, but what about this?" If everyone agrees, what point would there be to looking at the evidence again?

meh- I disagree.

They got it wrong and will go down in history as such.It takes 12 knuckleheads to nullify a jury. And yesterday, those 12 people managed to say that, yes, Casey Anthony lied about what happened to her child. But no, she had nothing to do with Caylee’s horrible death.

 

[NEVERENOUGHWDW]

For everyone that finds her not guilty and feel the jurors were correct I wonder how you would feel if it was your grandchild, niece, daughter or cousin.

I have a tough time thinking you would all be for the outcome.

 

[NikitaZee]

Folks can argue these points, bit by bit, until kingdom come and it won't matter. The only people who mattered - the jury - have spoken. They did their civic duty, there is nothing to suggest they did it stupidly or improperly or what have you. Game over!

 

[kinntj]

That happened here when my DD was about 6 months old. I remember because they were the same age-born days apart, and they only found her shoes and socks in the middle of a highway and they were little lacy anklets, like my DD had.

They never found her, he never said anything about it, and I believe ( hope ) he's still in jail.

The outcome of that case by you is incredibly sad. I hope it doesn't turn out the same, but it's not looking good.

 

[tvguy]

For everyone that finds her not guilty and feel the jurors were correct I wonder how you would feel if it was your grandchild, niece, daughter or cousin.

I have a tough time thinking you would all be for the outcome.

Not exactly the best example since the family testified in Casey's behalf.
So, I think that kind of answers your question.

 

[daughtersrus]

They got it wrong and will go down in history as such.It takes 12 knuckleheads to nullify a jury. And yesterday, those 12 people managed to say that, yes, Casey Anthony lied about what happened to her child. But no, she had nothing to do with Caylee’s horrible death.

I don't think that they said that at all. They said that the state failed to prove that she was guilty of what she was charged with. Had the charges been different, they may very well have found her guilty.

Edited to add...Does anyone remember the case of Riley Fox from Wilmington, IL?

http://abcnews.go.com/2020/riley-fox-case-scott-eby-charged-2004-assault/story?id=10866197

 

[happygirl]

Not exactly the best example since the family testified in Casey's behalf.
So, I think that kind of answers your question.

THe only family I would say that testified in her behalf would be Cindy

 

[Mosoh]

For everyone that finds her not guilty and feel the jurors were correct I wonder how you would feel if it was your grandchild, niece, daughter or cousin.

I have a tough time thinking you would all be for the outcome.

Not exactly the best example since the family testified in Casey's behalf.
So, I think that kind of answers your question.

ICA aunt Pam, "Appauled and now I'm angry and I say shame on jury, they not too bright or just plain lazy" LINK

 

[tvguy]

To me, the most interesting comments came from the alternate juror.
As he was not a part of deliberations, he has no idea what was discussed in the jury room. But he saw and heard everything the jurors did, and had the same opinion. And he agreed with the verdict. What that tells me, is there is something that people watching on TV did not see, hear, or feel, that the people in the courtroom did.

I think, as a member of the media, there is one thing I do not understand. Why did this case draw national attention? Sadly, in my area we have 5 mothers on trial of killing their children, and those cases aren't getting ANY attention. Yet people in my community are talking about Casey Anthony.

 

[NEVERENOUGHWDW]

Not exactly the best example since the family testified in Casey's behalf.
So, I think that kind of answers your question.

Not at all. I would hope that most of us come from loving, truth telling homes.
If criminals were never convicted based on a family member lying on the stand the streets would be filled with criminals.

 

[tvguy]

ICA aunt Pam, "Appauled and now I'm angry and I say shame on jury, they not too bright or just plain lazy" LINK [/QUOTE

Sorry, the opinion of someone who was once married to a relative of Casey Anthony, who was divorced from that relative 12 years ago, and never met Caylee, does not fit the description of family.

 

[daughtersrus]

To me, the most interesting comments came from the alternate juror.
As he was not a part of deliberations, he has no idea what was discussed in the jury room. But he saw and heard everything the jurors did, and had the same opinion. And he agreed with the verdict. What that tells me, is there is something that people watching on TV did not see, hear, or feel, that the people in the courtroom did.

Or it could be that those watching from home have been influenced by others since they were not sequestered like the jury.

I think, as a member of the media, there is one thing I do not understand. Why did this case draw national attention? Sadly, in my area we have 5 mothers on trial of killing their children, and those cases aren't getting ANY attention. Yet people in my community are talking about Casey Anthony.

I agree.

It's been weeks since we have heard anything about Timothy Pitzen from Aurora, IL. His mother committed suicide in May but he still hasn't been found.

 

[dngnb8]

For everyone that finds her not guilty and feel the jurors were correct I wonder how you would feel if it was your grandchild, niece, daughter or cousin.

I have a tough time thinking you would all be for the outcome.

Caylee was your grandchild? Im so sorry for your loss

 

[tvguy]

Not at all. I would hope that most of us come from loving, truth telling homes.
If criminals were never convicted based on a family member lying on the stand the streets would be filled with criminals.

Like I said in the post right above yours, something happened in that courtroom that we did not see, or maybe we did not pay attention to. I did not follow the case, and based on what little I know, she probably did it. But in America, you need evidence. Sifting through all the "expert" interviews in the past 24+ hours, insuccicent evidence is what seems to be the common theme as do why she was not convicted.
Now from my own jury experience.....granted a civil trial/wrongful death......I pretty much had my mind made up at the end of closing arguments. Then the judge explained the law to us. Yup, the defendants were awful, unethical, evil people. But there was no link to them breaking any laws.

 

[Mosoh]

ICA aunt Pam, "Appauled and now I'm angry and I say shame on jury, they not too bright or just plain lazy" LINK [/QUOTE

Sorry, the opinion of someone who was once married to a relative of Casey Anthony, who was divorced from that relative 12 years ago, and never met Caylee, does not fit the description of family.

Fair enough.

Since you are even farther removed I guess you're opinion is just as worthless.