Investigation Discovery : Aphrodite Jones : Bella Vita

[coco puff]

So many of us wonder the exact same thing ... how did all 12 buy what he was selling? The prosecution never waivered. Their opening was consistent with their evidence which was consistent with their closing. Baez was all over the place, and the points he was trying to make contradicted each other. All the talking heads, defense attorney's included, were saying that jury's always hold attorney's accountable for what they say they are going to prove, and an attorney should never say something in opening statments that he can't back up. Not only did he fail to back up what he said, but his closing arguments were different from what he said in opening. But this jury had nothing but praise for him, and were very critical of the prosecutors. Totally backwards! Those of us who are rational, reasonable thinkers are baffled. It just seems as though their minds were made up from day 1. No note taking during the State's case, very little deliberations, no evidence reviewed, and no questions to the judge. Then, a vote from 12-2 to 6-6 to 12-0 in 11 hours! Something went on in that jury room, and I hope someone's conscience gets to them, and they spill the beans.

Perfectly stated. may i add: An accident can be explained. Fca has not once done that. Not once. How can these talking heads just ignore that fact?

 

[MissJ]

I think the jurors decided JB's closing remarks were evidence and believed that load of carp. moo

 

[logicalgirl]

Thanks everyone for your posts and comments on the Aphrodite show - just could not bring myself to watch it but was really interested to read the various comments and synopsis's.:great:

 

[ThinkTank]

So many of us wonder the exact same thing ... how did all 12 buy what he was selling? The prosecution never waivered. Their opening was consistent with their evidence which was consistent with their closing. Baez was all over the place, and the points he was trying to make contradicted each other. All the talking heads, defense attorney's included, were saying that jury's always hold attorney's accountable for what they say they are going to prove, and an attorney should never say something in opening statments that he can't back up. Not only did he fail to back up what he said, but his closing arguments were different from what he said in opening. But this jury had nothing but praise for him, and were very critical of the prosecutors. Totally backwards! Those of us who are rational, reasonable thinkers are baffled. It just seems as though their minds were made up from day 1. No note taking during the State's case, very little deliberations, no evidence reviewed, and no questions to the judge. Then, a vote from 12-2 to 6-6 to 12-0 in 11 hours! Something went on in that jury room, and I hope someone's conscience gets to them, and they spill the beans.

Rob Lowe, who plays the Florida prosecutor in the controversial Caylee Anthony murder trial in "Prosecuting Casey Anthony" on Lifetime on January 19th, says that "the jury got it wrong."

http://www.usatoday.com/videos/news...asey-anthony-trial-jury-got-it-wrong/1840433/

excerpt of video:

Rob Lowe: "I think clearly, I think the jury got it wrong"

"I think that Jeff, again, a guy who has devoted his life to this world, said that in 30 years he had never seen a jury more willing to assume facts favorable to a defendant without any proof than this jury
why? the question is why and we try to answer it in the movie"

 

[Landonsmom02]

Yep, yep, yep, I agree with everything you said. :seeya:
I feel something definitely happened in the jury room.
:waitasec: hopefully someday we will find out.

Something went on in that jury room for sure. I don't think it's that they (jury) actually believed JB bs story. I think there was a stealth juror who was paid by team baez. That person persuaded the other 11 on how to vote. If they vote NG they can go home. If they vote G then they have to stay another some weeks for sentencing. They were selfish and didn't care about Caylee.
God rest her soul!

 

[SheRa]

I saw this in my TV listings and realized I couldn't bear to watch it. Aside from OJ, there has NEVER been a more obvious, bona fide, clear-cut case of murder that I have ever heard of, and it almost makes me sick to think of the absurd verdict or any show that defends it.

No one puts duct tape on a "drowned" child's mouth.

No one parties right after their child "accidentally" dies

No former cop would fail to call 911 after a "drowning"

No former cop would cover up a "drowning" by faking a kidnapping/murder(!)

No one tosses an "accidentally-drowned" child's body into the local woods

I know we all grieve differently, but NO ONE is giggly, evasive, and focused intently on their boyfriend's phone number after their 2-year-old "drowns"

No one sits in jail for 3 years when they could just admit to a common household accident, if indeed such an event occurred

I think jurors should have to pass some sort of logical reasoning test before they are allowed to sit on any type of trial. You know, "If X then Y. X occurs. Does Y occur?" etc.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Yes, I blame the jury ... and I also blame the jury selection. Why it seemed to be a criteria to make selections based on if they had / had not seen much in media is beyond me. You would have to have been living under a rock or in a fog of stupidity or delusion not to have heard of this case in Florida. The criteria should have been can you rise above what you have heard on this case and look at the FACTS you will be presented with, and do so fairly and justly with a logical mind. Ridiculous. Part of the reason she got away with it and that this case got so much attention is because she was a pretty white girl IMO. If she'd been overweight, unattractive, NON WHITE, her case would not have been all over the media, and we would have seen a completely different outcome here. Sorry, but I truly believe that.

 

[Tulessa]

Aphrodite Jones had asked on her twitter account what should happen to Casey Anthony when she is "forced" to attend the civil case and I replied:

"What should happen? If there is any justice, she will be struck by lightening!"

I don't know if many remember, but the very first day of the trial, the lights flickered three times in that courtroom. Caylee was there! She wanted justice so badly and she was let down so badly. I am not a super religious person, but I know God made it known that he was not happy when lightening struck that tree where Caylee was dumped. I dimly remember lightening striking again the day Casey was being released.

Aphrodite Jones means nothing to me. Her wanting to make this case to be anything less than a grave miscarriage of justice makes me sick. She is the perfect example of someone who will disregard her entire belief system for a story. A story that does not matter nor will it ever matter.

MOO

Don't forget the hawk!! It was a sure sign of a bad omen. I got so sick on my stomach when I heard it cry. I just knew it was not good, but then, I'm Cherokee and our belief system is kinda different....

 

[Raejen]

This case is a great example of why the judicial system needs an overhaul. I no longer think the average person is intelligent enough to sit on a jury. It's a radical alternative to what we have today...but I think the jury should consist of experts in law...in combination with peers. Or just experts in law period. People want to be spoon fed "CSI" perfected documents, in layman's terms, so all they have to do is say "yay" or "nay" in under 8-10 hours and go home. Most people don't want to think anymore for themselves. Drives me crazy.

 

[heidisams]

I finally watched it. It's been on my DVR for days, just didn't know if I could stomach it. Typically, I refuse to watch anything that supports any of the Anthony's or the defense. And won't do it again...

Aphrodite, flip flopped during the trial also. I compare her to Judge Larry Seidlin, former judge for Anna Nicole Smith trial, who has been trying so hard to get his mug on tv ever since that ridiculous circus of a trial that he created. His attempts to become a tv personality were a bust, and so what does he do? Imo, he takes the side of the defense to insert himself into the fca trial, for no other reason than to land a spot on all the shows covering the case. And it worked... It's common knowledge that these cable legal news shows always invite legal analysts to represent both sides. From what I saw, there were few who supported the defense and their cookoo for cocoa puffs theory. Anyone credible, like Judge Alex, Judge Strickland, and many more, were pro-prosecution, and would get the job above Judge Seidlin. I doubt he would've even been considered.

And consider the timing of Aphrodite's show. Prosecuting Casey Anthony airs the following week. So far, every time an event surrounding fca makes the news, these shows gather all their legal analysts/correspondents and it's showtime... You have many pro-prosecution reps, like Jean Casares, Beth Karas, Mike Brooks, as well as, Diane Fanning and Ann Rule, etc., who are more likely to be invited on than Aphrodite. Unless, of course, she flip flops... Imo, it's all about dollar signs for her, and pulling in the viewers/ratings for her show, future book sales, and tv facetime... Controversy sells, and books about fca's guilt and that awful verdict are already out there. Jeff Ashton, and others, already covered it. Who's book would you buy? And most of the above mentioned believe the jury got it wrong, which has been her belief, as well. So, she sets herself apart, and now says they got it right. In the show, Aphrodite's pov was confusing to me... What she says about fca's guilt and the evidence doesn't coincide with an acquittal, imo. She was careful not to alienate the viewers, the majority who think she got away with murder, and it's at the very end when she says the jury got it right. She then visits little Caylee's memorial site and puts a flower down. Really? She, essentially, says fca should've been acquitted, denying that baby justice, and then puts a flower on her grave/memorial... I think she's a sellout and I hope this backfires on her... There was no justice in that verdict.

 

[heidisams]

So many of us wonder the exact same thing ... how did all 12 buy what he was selling? The prosecution never waivered. Their opening was consistent with their evidence which was consistent with their closing. Baez was all over the place, and the points he was trying to make contradicted each other. All the talking heads, defense attorney's included, were saying that jury's always hold attorney's accountable for what they say they are going to prove, and an attorney should never say something in opening statments that he can't back up. Not only did he fail to back up what he said, but his closing arguments were different from what he said in opening. But this jury had nothing but praise for him, and were very critical of the prosecutors. Totally backwards! Those of us who are rational, reasonable thinkers are baffled. It just seems as though their minds were made up from day 1. No note taking during the State's case, very little deliberations, no evidence reviewed, and no questions to the judge. Then, a vote from 12-2 to 6-6 to 12-0 in 11 hours! Something went on in that jury room, and I hope someone's conscience gets to them, and they spill the beans.

I will never, ever understand this verdict! And all the whoppers that those 12 bought, hook, line and sinker... Compartmentalizing. Really? I'm sure all those parents out there that have lost a child, and are so grief stricken that they can't even breath, would love to know that they can just compartmentalize! Or is it just the ones that were molested when they were kids that have the ability? ... Not really sure, I guess we should have the jurors clarify that for us...

 

[Remove the covering]

Yes, I blame the jury ... and I also blame the jury selection. Why it seemed to be a criteria to make selections based on if they had / had not seen much in media is beyond me. You would have to have been living under a rock or in a fog of stupidity or delusion not to have heard of this case in Florida. The criteria should have been can you rise above what you have heard on this case and look at the FACTS you will be presented with, and do so fairly and justly with a logical mind. Ridiculous. Part of the reason she got away with it and that this case got so much attention is because she was a pretty white girl IMO. If she'd been overweight, unattractive, NON WHITE, her case would not have been all over the media, and we would have seen a completely different outcome here. Sorry, but I truly believe that.

I was just about to make this exact point- I think the trial was over at the point of jury selection. By making ignorance and indifference about the case a key criteria for selection, I believe the jury that was selected lacked the inquisitiveness and critical thinking skills needed for an appropriate verdict. All of the information-seeking types were weeded out! If this approach to jury selection is used in every criminal case, then the cases with the best, most obvious, and most publicized evidence are the most likely to seat a jury that will fail to convict. That seems like the opposite of justice to me.

 

[Skully]

Yes, I blame the jury ... and I also blame the jury selection. Why it seemed to be a criteria to make selections based on if they had / had not seen much in media is beyond me. You would have to have been living under a rock or in a fog of stupidity or delusion not to have heard of this case in Florida. The criteria should have been can you rise above what you have heard on this case and look at the FACTS you will be presented with, and do so fairly and justly with a logical mind. Ridiculous. Part of the reason she got away with it and that this case got so much attention is because she was a pretty white girl IMO. If she'd been overweight, unattractive, NON WHITE, her case would not have been all over the media, and we would have seen a completely different outcome here. Sorry, but I truly believe that.

BBM

I 100% agree. I am white, I used to be pretty, years ago, and I agree. Color matters and so does what you look like. I follow so many missing persons cases, and White, blond, beautiful, $$ or fame, gets the media. They stay in the headlines longer, and here if FL you can be too pretty to do time.

 

[SallyLu]

I am not going to say "jury tampering" :what: but for me it goes beyond being lazy. Something was definitely wrong in that jury room and I will never back away from that thought.




Oh, I am glad I am another that didn't watch this piece of crap.

 

[Mrs G Norris]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxR0yQJpm_k"]Casey Anthony Bella Vita* - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Prentiss]

Thank you Mrs G Norris