Search results

And that compares to him saying to the jury that the last time Caylee was seen alive she was with Casey? Not in my book.

When did George lie to protect her? He was implicating her to police from the beginning. He didn't pull any punches, he was pointing a finger at her all along. And on the witness stand he was the one to testify that Casey was the last one to have seen Caylee. No protection there. And I...

You are making HUGE assumptions about this jury based on a few short interviews with three ( maybe 4) of the 17 jurors. What faulty logic are speaking of? What rules did they break? Did any of the jurors say they gave weight to the OS? I saw the interviews as well and I did not make those...

:rocker:

Thanks, but it was originally titled If You Agree With the Verdict Tell Us Why, but a mod changed it and I did not see the change before I posted.

I think that it is important to note that despite the mythology surrounding Tony and his feelings towards Caylee, it was testified to that he adored Caylee and that he never had a problem with her being around.

I do believe that Caylee died while in the custody of Casey. But based on the state's case I do not believe BARD that it was murder. I don't know WHAT happened. Neither side convinced me of anything. Therefore the only verdict I could agree with is NG. But that DOES NOT mean that I believe...

<modsnip> <modsnip> that if you agree with the verdict then you must not understand reasonable doubt, circumstantial evidence and the like. I am an attorney myself. I fully understand the standard of reasonable doubt, the weight of CE and of an OS. And I submit that in light of this unanimous...

I disagree, I do not think that the circumstantial evidence taken together painted a picture that Casey murdered Caylee. In fact I would feel the same way had the defense not put on a case at all.

I agreed with the verdict simply because I do not believe that the state proved their case BARD. But let me say this: I watched this trial with a presumption that she was innocent, one that I would maintain up and until the state proved otherwise and I do not believe that they ever did. I...

There is a difference from the defense believing that the report was inaccurate and arguing that point and the state KNOWING that it was inaccurate.

It has nothing to do with the closing statement.

You should back up what you say. At least provide a link to the point in the trial that LDB admitted her error to the DT in open court. Edited to add: you are right, we do not know for a fact that the state knew that their evidence was faulty. But based on the word of Mr. Bradley, who asserts...

That is a good read for those who don't understand the merits of this situation.

OK, I am not going to argue with you anymore. This will bear itself out and I imagine at some point the SA is going to have to comment on it.

As am I.

Ok, I'll say this again....the state did not provide anyone with a corrected report. If they had the court would have AUTOMATICALLY taken corrective measures to ensure that Casey's constitutional rights were protected. There were no measures taken therefore there was no effort by the state to...

Link to what? I am asserting that she did NOT provide the correct information.

If LDB had corrected the report in open court JP would have HAD to give an instruction to the jury. No woulda, coulda, shoulda. He would have had to in order to ensure due process. Not only did that not happen, but the most glaring omission is a motion for a mistrial based on incorrect...

I'm familiar with that case, also with what is reasonably considered exculpatory and I stand by what I said.