Scott Peterson vs. KC - Which case had/has more evidence?*POLL ADDED*

[MaryB]

Casey's, hands down.

 

[Silmarion]

If it can be proved that Casey killed her child on purpose, she belongs in a mental institution. But if it was an accident, then perhaps it wasn't Casey's fault, but she's afraid to tell the truth.

Maybe it's me. It's hard for me to believe that a mother would deliberately kill her own child unless she has a severe mental illness.

Has Casey been examined by a good psychiatrist? A good psychiatrist can usually tell when a patient is lying. Otherwise, this incident reminds me of the film, The Bad Seed. This is about a child who kills and steals without any feeling of remorse. She seems to have 2 personalities. One sweet and nice with her parents, and another with her friends or anyone she suspects of knowing the truth about her. The child was adopted, and like the real mother, it is discovered in the film (book-play) that she too committed many crimes and eventually disappeared, leaving the baby alone. Was there any pathology in Cayce's ancestors? A grandmother, an aunt, a cousin, anyone? Also wondered if Cayce was adopted as an infant? Not heard anything about that.

 

[stilettos]

If it can be proved that Casey killed her child on purpose, she belongs in a mental institution. But if it was an accident, then perhaps it wasn't Casey's fault, but she's afraid to tell the truth.

Maybe it's me. It's hard for me to believe that a mother would deliberately kill her own child unless she has a severe mental illness.

Has Casey been examined by a good psychiatrist? A good psychiatrist can usually tell when a patient is lying. Otherwise, this incident reminds me of the film, The Bad Seed. This is about a child who kills and steals without any feeling of remorse. She seems to have 2 personalities. One sweet and nice with her parents, and another with her friends or anyone she suspects of knowing the truth about her. The child was adopted, and like the real mother, it is discovered in the film (book-play) that she too committed many crimes and eventually disappeared, leaving the baby alone. Was there any pathology in Cayce's ancestors? A grandmother, an aunt, a cousin, anyone? Also wondered if Cayce was adopted as an infant? Not heard anything about that.

She has been examined by two...when the DT got the reports back they immediately removed them from their witness list...meaning their info in no way helped the defense. Also, the Anthony's attny was allowed to see said reports and says the defendant is deeply disturbed. But no mental illness that would prevent her from being found guilty and competant.

 

[Hope for the Best]

Also she is accused of lying about a nanny. But did she? She gives a name, and the nanny says she never heard of Casey or Caylee. If something happened to the child in the nanny's care, I wouldn't be surprised if she did deny it. But is she telling the truth? From the letters Casey exchanged with some boyfriends, she mentions a nanny quite a bit. She also mentions a job. I guess I don't know what to believe. Seems like the job turned out to be a lie. But the nanny, I don't know.

In the DT's opening statement, they pretty much dismissed the nanny scenario and decided to go with an accidental drowning. If there really was a nanny who stole the child, why would they claim that the child accidentally drowned? Personally, I think bringing in the drowning was a big mistake. Had they stuck to this nanny story line, they could have continued to claim that the nanny did it, that the nanny had access to her car/home/etc., and that Casey thought that Caylee was in the nanny's good care after June 16th, which is why she was so happy at all of her Fusian parties. As far as their not being a Zenaida Gonzalez, that could have been a case of fraud and false identity (as in the nanny used a fake name and fooled Casey since the beginning). Now, I still think this would have been a load of crap, but I think that would have been more likely to create reasonable doubt than completely switching gears and claiming it was a drowning. I think they definitely have more evidence pointing to the cause of death being a murder than they do to definitively linking Casey as the murderer.

 

[Chilly Willy]

The cases are very similar in that the defense in the SP case also created a fantasy defense and tried to pass blame onto various innocent people, including a family living in a brown van, devil worshipers, sex offenders, and a man in another van (green, I think) who was seen letting Laci out to pee on the side of the road. Oh, there were also the nincompoop burglers on bikes and the white panel van that was parked outside a neighbors home. All spaghetti thrown at the wall and none of it sticking. It actually became absurd.

In the SP case, the defense rested without putting a single witness on the stand and claimed they'd proven Scott's innocence during the prosecution's case. I think in reality they knew they had no case. I won't be too surprised to see Baez do the same thing although I think his ego and desire for fame won't let him. If Baez does put on a defense, he'll do nothing but embarrass himself. Actually, he's done that already.

 

[jesuismonica84]

I live in Modesto and a lot of people were angry when they tried to say the homeless that roam the park had probably grabbed her while she walked the trail. Everyone knows that was a bunch of bs, the trail separates itself from the actually park side where the homeless sleep or hang out for the day. They don't bother anyone as neither to they ask for anything. Also the trail runs through backyards of a strip of houses with dozens of people walking and running back and forth everyday.

 

[hpvdr]

Many have posted similarities between the State of Florida's case against Casey Anthony and the State of California's case against Scott Peterson. I am wondering if based on the evidence presented thus far in Casey Anthony's case, if members feel that the State of Florida is/has presented as good of a case against Casey Anthony, as the State of California did against Scott Peterson??

 

[Scamperoo]

There is much more evidence in the KC Anthony case than SP's, there is also an admittance by the DT that the defendant was in the vicinity of and aware of the death of her daughter.

 

[BlOnDe_GuRrL]

I believe they have a ton more circumstantial evidence in Casey's case.. but, will a jury convict a 25 year old woman who murdered her daughter as quick as they would convict a 30 something year old man who killed his wife & unborn son?
I sure hope so.

 

[Nali87]

This case has so many ups and downs, pushes and pulls, I don't know what to think. I know parents sometimes kill their children, and Casey does seem to be disturbed. From letters I've read between her and her boyfriends, she seems to be a very angry person. Also she is accused of lying about a nanny. But did she? She gives a name, and the nanny says she never heard of Casey or Caylee. If something happened to the child in the nanny's care, I wouldn't be surprised if she did deny it. But is she telling the truth? From the letters Casey exchanged with some boyfriends, she mentions a nanny quite a bit. She also mentions a job. I guess I don't know what to believe. Seems like the job turned out to be a lie. But the nanny, I don't know.

She said that Jeff Hopkins recommended the Nanny because she had been doing such a terrific job with his kids. Jeff Hopkins testified that he hadn't seen Casey much since high school, ran into her at a concert/party, exchanged numbers, texted once and that was pretty much it. He testified he never recommended a Zenaida Gonzales. He testified he doesn't even have children! Secondly, no one has ever seen Zenaida Gonzales or spoken to her via telephone. Thirdly she couldn't match "her Zanny" to any of the photographs shown to her by the police. I don't know what you mean by the "nanny said". There's like ten Zenaida Gonzales in Florida. Casey couldn't pick any of them out the pictures she was shown. So the police never interviewed "A Zenaida Gonzales who actually was a nanny". She drove the police to "Zanny's" apartment and it turned out no one ever lived there. She usually dropped Caylee by the steps, she said. Never went in to check the surroundings, nope. I think by now the prosecution surely has proved beyond even the tiniest doubt that there never was a Zanny.

 

[The Farm]

I voted Casey. And just like when a lot of folks thought Scott Peterson would walk I had faith they would find him guilty. I feel the same way about Casey Anthony. I have faith in the state attorney and their ability to prove their case, I have faith in the jury to do the right thing. I have a LOT of faith in Judge Perry to make sure everything is done by the letter of the law so the conviction can never be overturned on appeal.

I really believe that Casey Anthony will get the death penalty and I hope she enjoys her time at Lowell right up until they ask her if she would prefer the electric chair or a lethal injection.

I thought it was only lethal injection now?

And Good Morning all.

 

[Americka]

Florida allows prisoners to choose between lethal injection and electrocution, however lethal injection is the primary method.

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/methods-execution

 

[The Farm]

Thank You Amerika. I thought they did away with the chair.

 

[n8swife]

Hello All,
I am new to websleuths, I have been lurking on the boards for weeks now reading all of your awesome ideas and comments on ICA. I really wanted to join you all so I just recieved permission yesterday to activate my account.
I am still learning the ropes and rules so I hope I don't mess up in posting etiquette or break any rules. I am not even sure if this is the right place to leave this comment, but it mentioned Scott and Casey so I thought this would
be a good place as my thought pertains to them.

I recently read the comment someone left (sorry, I don't know who to give
credit to) about how Cindy was comforting herself with Caylee's teddy bear in the weeks after she learned of her disappearance and that it mysteriously disappeared. This reminded me of an excerpt I read in Sharon Rocha's book "For Lacy" where she wrote about how Laci only had perhaps one ultrasound picture of Conner and how she was intending or did show it off to her family and friends. One day Laci could not find the picture and was devestated that she had lost the first picture she had of her baby boy. Sharon went on to speculate that she thought Scott may have taken it and thrown it away.
I know that you guys have been comparing the two and I just wanted to leave this comment as an example of just how alike they appear to be. The idea being that they both possibly took things from people that meant something to them, either by profiding comfort ( The teddy bear) or caused happiness ( the ultrasound picture) and got rid of them.
Again, I apologize if this is not in the right place. I have just been wanting to share this idea for a while.
I am happy to be amongst you all and I look forward to reading more of your wonderful ideas and thoughts.

 

[Fluffy Puppy]

WAY more circumstantial in the Anthony trial, but it all comes down to a jury. I remember thinking that SP might get off because you never know any individual juror's threshold for "beyond a reasonable doubt". It was enough for those 12 Peterson jurors to get over reasonable doubt, I suspect it will be the same here, but you never know.

And it doesn't take one to get her off. It takes 12. I don't see that happening.

 

[Purple Iris]

Hello All,
I am new to websleuths, I have been lurking on the boards for weeks now reading all of your awesome ideas and comments on ICA. I really wanted to join you all so I just recieved permission yesterday to activate my account.
I am still learning the ropes and rules so I hope I don't mess up in posting etiquette or break any rules. I am not even sure if this is the right place to leave this comment, but it mentioned Scott and Casey so I thought this would
be a good place as my thought pertains to them.

I recently read the comment someone left (sorry, I don't know who to give
credit to) about how Cindy was comforting herself with Caylee's teddy bear in the weeks after she learned of her disappearance and that it mysteriously disappeared. This reminded me of an excerpt I read in Sharon Rocha's book "For Lacy" where she wrote about how Laci only had perhaps one ultrasound picture of Conner and how she was intending or did show it off to her family and friends. One day Laci could not find the picture and was devestated that she had lost the first picture she had of her baby boy. Sharon went on to speculate that she thought Scott may have taken it and thrown it away.
I know that you guys have been comparing the two and I just wanted to leave this comment as an example of just how alike they appear to be. The idea being that they both possibly took things from people that meant something to them, either by profiding comfort ( The teddy bear) or caused happiness ( the ultrasound picture) and got rid of them.
Again, I apologize if this is not in the right place. I have just been wanting to share this idea for a while.
I am happy to be amongst you all and I look forward to reading more of your wonderful ideas and thoughts.

Welcome to the board! You're gonna love it here, as I'm sure you've observed from sitting quietly and reading.

I read Sharon's book, and had forgotton about the ultra-sound picture of baby Conner.
Thanks for the reminder.

Anyway, I think that there is way more evidence in this case as we've seen presented, than what there was in Scott's case.

And, you are so right - 2 peas in a pod. Can you imagine had these 2 ever met up???

Again ~ Welcome and don't be shy any more!!
:greetings::welcome4:

 

[Cailin Rua]

\
Maybe it's me. It's hard for me to believe that a mother would deliberately kill her own child unless she has a severe mental illness.

Has Casey been examined by a good psychiatrist? A good psychiatrist can usually tell when a patient is lying. Otherwise, this incident reminds me of the film, The Bad Seed. This is about a child who kills and steals without any feeling of remorse. She seems to have 2 personalities. One sweet and nice with her parents, and another with her friends or anyone she suspects of knowing the truth about her. The child was adopted, and like the real mother, it is discovered in the film (book-play) that she too committed many crimes and eventually disappeared, leaving the baby alone. Was there any pathology in Cayce's ancestors? A grandmother, an aunt, a cousin, anyone? Also wondered if Cayce was adopted as an infant? Not heard anything about that.

Parents kill their children for many reasons, sometimes to get back at the other parent. I don't know about "severely disturbed" in the sense of "not responsible for their actions," although certainly you can say there's something "wrong" with people who do that.

I don't believe Casey is adopted and I don't think it would be relevant either way if she was. Certainly it's not more likely to make her a "bad seed." Certain mental illnesses can be hereditary to some degree but murder isn't.

 

[ami]

If it can be proved that Casey killed her child on purpose, she belongs in a mental institution. But if it was an accident, then perhaps it wasn't Casey's fault, but she's afraid to tell the truth.

Maybe it's me. It's hard for me to believe that a mother would deliberately kill her own child unless she has a severe mental illness.

Has Casey been examined by a good psychiatrist? A good psychiatrist can usually tell when a patient is lying. Otherwise, this incident reminds me of the film, The Bad Seed. This is about a child who kills and steals without any feeling of remorse. She seems to have 2 personalities. One sweet and nice with her parents, and another with her friends or anyone she suspects of knowing the truth about her. The child was adopted, and like the real mother, it is discovered in the film (book-play) that she too committed many crimes and eventually disappeared, leaving the baby alone. Was there any pathology in Cayce's ancestors? A grandmother, an aunt, a cousin, anyone? Also wondered if Cayce was adopted as an infant? Not heard anything about that.

I suppose you could argue that anyone capable of murdering a child has what the layman would consider a serious mental illness. Pedophiles do, too. As far as I know, neither can be rehabilitated to suddenly grow into a person who will no longer endanger children. Therefore psychological "help" would be of relatively little benefit for effecting change in the criminal or safety in society. Taking them out of society for life is therefore one of the two options (the other being death) that will suffice.

If Casey Anthony had an incurable genetic predisposition for murdering her child without remorse - or she has no genetic predisposition and just chose to do it because she's a bad person - the result was the same and her daughter is dead and now Casey is subject to the laws that govern us all, that she knew about before committing murder, that she gambled on when she took another human's life. She hid it, so she clearly knew it was wrong (and was not so mentally ill that she didn't know the difference), so she's subject to the punishment.

I feel the same way about Scott Peterson. I feel he left more evidence in the "motive" and "premeditation" categories than ICA - the clincher when he told Amber on December 9th that he lost his wife, then the same day purchased a boat that he used to get to his chosen dumping ground. I feel SP left an equal amount of damning evidence on his computer - ICA with the chloroform search, SP with the search for tides in the Bay off the Berkeley marina where Laci was ultimately found. I feel ICA left far, far more evidence of her proximity to her victim and possible method of death than SP did - the trunk, the yard, the bags, the tape. SP left the anchor imprints but no direct evidence of how he killed her (as far as I remember...)

Both continue to give character evidence in the form of their blank faces and missing emotional cues during key places in the testimony. ICA tries to act a little harder than SP, though she's not successful, IMO. Jurors commented on SP's cold stare. Afterward I will not be surprised if ICA jurors comment on the same thing.

However in the end I think it's perhaps easier to condemn a man to death than a young woman. Human nature? Like some new posters commented here, they can't imagine a mother killing her child (though it happens so much, intellectually we should all know it's more than just possible whether we want to imagine it or not) so if the jurors feel the same, I think ICA's jury will have slightly less inclination to sentence her to death.. also CA has become an incredibly sympathetic figure, and a victim in her own right, so sentencing her only daughter to death might feel like further victimization of the living victims - whereas SP's parents did NOT come off as sympathetic at all and it was hard to see them as victims of Scott in the slightest.

 

[babydollresa]

IMO, these cases are very similiar in the fact that both are relying/relied on mainly circumstantial evidence. They also deal with an individual being charged with killing their loved ones (with children involved in both cases) and then claiming a kidnapping or disappearance. What bugs me is that SP got the death penalty and they are not even seeking it for KC when there is way more evidence against KC than there was Scott IMO. Agree? Disagree?

THEY ARE SEEKING THE DEATH PENALTY AGAINST CASEY ANTHONY:great:

 

[wandering]

Many have posted similarities between the State of Florida's case against Casey Anthony and the State of California's case against Scott Peterson. I am wondering if based on the evidence presented thus far in Casey Anthony's case, if members feel that the State of Florida is/has presented as good of a case against Casey Anthony, as the State of California did against Scott Peterson??

I find it interesting that both cases involve hair evidence. It was the hair caught in the wire cutters that convicted Scott, and the hair in the trunk will convict Casey. Cheers for hairs!