2011.05.20 On a Scale of 1 to 10 How do you Feel About this Jury?

[wallflower67]

I really wish the jurors would be quiet now. Every time one of them speaks out, it just makes me sick.

 

[PeteyGirl]

I think you may have hit on an eye-opener here. I've wondered about this ever since Jay Leno started the feature on his show, "The Jaywalkers." They're mostly college students and, from their answers to Jay's questions, one would think they all lived in caves! Another indication of the "dumbing of America" is our experiences whenever we deal with the average employee in a large corporation. It's pretty obvious to me the problem is not a lack of intelligence, but is a lack of education. I don't know how this problem will ever be solved since our current uneducated students are our future teachers! The Pinellas 12 I think are just further proof of this condition in our country. (Is it the same in the world?)

I agree to your statement I bolded above, and would add that education is what teaches you HOW to use the intelligence you do have.

People do not learn how to think critically unless they are taught how.

And besides the "dumbing down" of America, we have the "Not My Problem!!" attitude of shirking heavy responsibility, blaming someone/anyone else for why we can't live/work/be happy/have a decent life/make a tough decision.

 

[krkrjx]

I know but I guess it goes back to this jury just being lazy. They believed she was guilty but there was no smoking gun and they didn't want to spend anytime going through the evidence, etc. It was just the easy way out.

But honestly, whatever they say in the press, I don't believe anyways. I think a lot of their comments are just for the public... they feel bad, they think she is guilty, it's the state's fault, etc.

Well, their laziness did not prevent them from voting guilty. If even one of the jurors believed Casey was guilty, why not vote that way! At least with a guilty verdict, if there really was not enough evidence to convict, an appeals court will have a look-see.

With a not guilty verdict, there is no option for any court or anyone to see that justice has been served!

Even being lazy, or wanting to get out of there and go home, they could have voted guilty on at least one of the crimes against Caylee given the evidence presented at trial. Were the jurors really so obtuse that they thought Caylee could have died by accident? The child was duct taped, bagged and thrown in a swamp, FGS. Everything about this screams murder, while nothing about it even whispers accident.

It makes me wonder how any of these jurors manage to find their way home at the end of each day.

 

[RR0004]

I agree to your statement I bolded above, and would add that education is what teaches you HOW to use the intelligence you do have.

People do not learn how to think critically unless they are taught how.

And besides the "dumbing down" of America, we have the "Not My Problem!!" attitude of shirking heavy responsibility, blaming someone/anyone else for why we can't live/work/be happy/have a decent life/make a tough decision.

Plus the jury lived in another county...so what did they fear?
I pray for society as a whole...with the likes of Casey Anthony free to roam, we should all be afraid.

 

[runsdeep]

I wish they would all be forced to watch how Offender Anthony was when they were not in the room. How easily she could turn off her act. That, if it were me, would make me sick. How easily I was "played". Of course, I would have stuck to my beliefs and hung the jury, though.

they sat there and watched her wipe her eyes and face and blow her nose into the same dry tissue all day for several days there.

 

[runsdeep]

they were a jury of her peers

 

[pip]

they were a jury of her peers

Or a jury drinking beers.

 

[Little Black Dress]

..about the only thing that keeps me sane some days----regarding this wretched WRONG verdict-----is the thought...the hope...

..that the 3 prosecutors were reading the juror comments---livid at 1st of course, and then as more and more came out-----one day they spontaneously burst into laughter!!! the doubled over "laughter-is-good-for-the-soul" knee-slapping All or Nothing !!

..realizing----there WAS nothing else they could have done---or said---or presented---this jury was simply too STUPID to have "got it" anyway..!

..and then once the giggles subsided---frankG got to work on their response to the probation issue...

...LDB got to work on their "costs for investigation"....

...and hopefully jeffA is penning their experience in a book somewhere-----now that i would read-----and PAY for to do so.

Bolding mine.

Your wish has been granted.

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=148049"]Imperfect Justice: Prosecuting Casey Anthony - Jeff Ashton - Author - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

 

[PeteyGirl]

they were a jury of her peers

Apparently :waitasec:

 

[PeteyGirl]

Plus the jury lived in another county...so what did they fear?
I pray for society as a whole...with the likes of Casey Anthony free to roam, we should all be afraid.

It has become "OK" to relinquish responsibility, at a cultural level.

"It's not fair!" used to be a protest an eleven year old would make when given garbage duty.

"I can't do my job because the people above me won't do theirs" is just another version of this.

In defense of this jury (not to absolve them, but to understand why they did what they did), the stress and overwhelm of six weeks of sequestration, seeing the remains of a precious child argued over by a bunch of scientists and lawyers must have crashed their hard drives.

Where is personal integrity? Where is courage and persistence?

IF you find a way to "select" 17 people who exemplify qualities such as "not my problem" and "whatever you say" and "it's too hard" and "it's not fair", you'll have a great chance of these 17 people defaulting.

This jury DEFAULTED. Their "not guilty" verdict is worthless, as those who have spoken up state they believe she IS guilty, of something.

The whole verdict is a lie, even to the nauseated jury members who rendered it!

 

[lauriej]

I think the prosecution in their closing, should have gone over the jury instructions. I don't know if this jury would have listened, but maybe at least
one would have for a hung jury.

..after both sides had concluded closing arguments---then judgeP read aloud the entire jury instructions to them......and us.

..we all we aware ( wasn't the jury too ???-i'm SURE they had been TOLD..) that if they had ANY questions---on ANYTHING ( testimony, videos, the LAW etc..) that they would all be brought back into court---with the judge---and kc/the defense--- and the SAO----and us---"live!"--and we would all hear what it was they wanted to know about.......they never asked...EVER.

This jury took every word spoken by JB,CM and DS as facts. They didn't have to prove anything. Also, all of the defenses witness were right in the jury's mind. How did this case get like this? IMO CA and JB are not likable people.
How did they win this jury over?

..the jury foreman bonded with the defense---and as he himself says ---in the deliberation room.. "where he orchestrated the whole situation.."

Jury Foreman: Yes, I can go a little more in depth into what we did in the deliberation room since I was the one who had to orchestrate the whole situation.

---greta and juror #11--the Foreman...

VAN SUSTEREN: Yes. How -- did they---the prosecution--- do a good job?

Jury Foreman: Well, I thought, you know, for what they -you know, I -- really, in prosecution, when it was over and done with, when they rested, I wanted more. I wanted more. I really thought the prosecution -- I don't know if there was more for them to give. I wanted more, though, because I thought it really put us at that point in a situation where this is going to be -- this is going to be difficult.

( pardon me? if there wasn't any more---how could there BE more??)

And I thought you could tell they knew what they were doing. They -- you know, they were, you know, very professional. And in some regards, at some times, I thought they made light of things that I didn't take -- I didn't consider was in good taste.

VAN SUSTEREN: You mean the -- there's one reference, I think, in closing argument, where Jeff Ashton, the prosecutor, got slapped around a little bit by the judge for smirking.

Jury Foreman: For smirking, yes. I thought that was very distasteful. ( he doesn't mention baez and the "who cut the cheese?" as "distaseful"...but----ashton was smirking ! )

VAN SUSTEREN: How about the defense team?

Jury Foreman: Well, the defense team -- you know, I really thought the defense team -- they were always -- again, they were very professional. I thought they did a good job. You know, they brought up -- they pushed the reasonable doubt, and the reasonable doubt was there. So they -- you know, they did a good job of defending, you know, when the prosecution rested, defending. ( ummm...huh?)

 

[Concerned Papa]

"Well, I thought, you know, for what they -you know, I -- really, in prosecution, when it was over and done with, when they rested, I wanted more. I wanted more. I really thought the prosecution -- I don't know if there was more for them to give. I wanted more, though, because I thought it really put us at that point in a situation where this is going to be -- this is going to be difficult."

This incoherent, bumbling, disjointed speech and thought process is from this jury's elected leader?

No wonder a murderer was set free. The evidence was WAY over their ability to comprehend.

 

[runsdeep]

..after both sides had concluded closing arguments---then judgeP read aloud the entire jury instructions to them......and us.

..we all we aware ( wasn't the jury too ???-i'm SURE they had been TOLD..) that if they had ANY questions---on ANYTHING ( testimony, videos, the LAW etc..) that they would all be brought back into court---with the judge---and kc/the defense--- and the SAO----and us---"live!"--and we would all hear what it was they wanted to know about.......they never asked...EVER.



..the jury foreman bonded with the defense---and as he himself says ---in the deliberation room.. "where he orchestrated the whole situation.."

Jury Foreman: Yes, I can go a little more in depth into what we did in the deliberation room since I was the one who had to orchestrate the whole situation.

---greta and juror #11--the Foreman...

VAN SUSTEREN: Yes. How -- did they---the prosecution--- do a good job?

Jury Foreman: Well, I thought, you know, for what they -you know, I -- really, in prosecution, when it was over and done with, when they rested, I wanted more. I wanted more. I really thought the prosecution -- I don't know if there was more for them to give. I wanted more, though, because I thought it really put us at that point in a situation where this is going to be -- this is going to be difficult.

( pardon me? if there wasn't any more---how could there BE more??)

And I thought you could tell they knew what they were doing. They -- you know, they were, you know, very professional. And in some regards, at some times, I thought they made light of things that I didn't take -- I didn't consider was in good taste.

VAN SUSTEREN: You mean the -- there's one reference, I think, in closing argument, where Jeff Ashton, the prosecutor, got slapped around a little bit by the judge for smirking.

Jury Foreman: For smirking, yes. I thought that was very distasteful. ( he doesn't mention baez and the "who cut the cheese?" as "distaseful"...but----ashton was smirking ! )

VAN SUSTEREN: How about the defense team?

Jury Foreman: Well, the defense team -- you know, I really thought the defense team -- they were always -- again, they were very professional. I thought they did a good job. You know, they brought up -- they pushed the reasonable doubt, and the reasonable doubt was there. So they -- you know, they did a good job of defending, you know, when the prosecution rested, defending. ( ummm...huh?)

prosecution--intelligence and class
defense--in the gutter

 

[Horace Finklestein]

I think I can finally add my two cents, and not get banned for life. I wish there was some way to send those twelve people to jail for not doing their duty. They were to examine evidence and they did not even do that. All they wanted at that point was to go home. So a precious child lost her life for nothing, and her own Mother got away with murder. I give them a -1 (minus one).

As we learned that donuts, hockey games and Batman movies were priorities for them...it didn't bode well for a reasonable outcome imo.

 

[Carolina Girl]

I think everyone of these jurors should go online and watch the entire trial over, start to finish. Then they may see how horribly wrong they were. I would like to know that they all know they were wrong. Would not change anything, I know. But it may help if someone accidentally calls them to be on another jury. Come to think of it, if I was an attorney in Pinellas County I would seriously consider asking every potential juror if they were on this jury!

 

[Dignity4Victims]

I agree to your statement I bolded above, and would add that education is what teaches you HOW to use the intelligence you do have.

People do not learn how to think critically unless they are taught how.

And besides the "dumbing down" of America, we have the "Not My Problem!!" attitude of shirking heavy responsibility, blaming someone/anyone else for why we can't live/work/be happy/have a decent life/make a tough decision.

To a point, I very much agree with you about the dumbing down of America, particularly in relation to basic Civics; something in which we should all be well-versed.

But the part that I disagree with is that even if this Jury would have been well-versed and educated, the verdict was more about pure laziness than it was education and I partially fault Judge Perry for that. He rushed the selection of this Jury so much that he completely ignored the fact that he had sitting Jurors on this chosen panel who were honest enough to inform him that they had upcoming plans of cruises, etc.

Judge Perry attempted to poo-poo that away claiming, "Oh we'll be done by then", and look what happened. What, the case was completed a mere few days prior to this person's cruise and other Jurors who had set plans. They still had the Penalty Phase, and they knew it.

This Jury wasn't stupid, they just chose the easy way out. They put their own plans ahead of the justice for Caylee, knowing they would have to be held longer if they rightfully convicted her. I've seen a lot of talk about what the State didn't present, but no matter how much longer this case would have gone with the State presenting everything possible, there was no way this Jury was going to convict.

As was the case in her life as well as her death, selfishness won and Caylee lost. Again.

 

[bayouland]

I honestly feel HHJP sent the wrong impression to the jury (rush rush rush). I feel this was a tragic mistake.

I also feel he did not spend enough time explaining reasonable doubt.

 

[Bobbisangel]

I honestly feel HHJP sent the wrong impression to the jury (rush rush rush). I feel this was a tragic mistake.

I also feel he did not spend enough time explaining reasonable doubt.

I feel that way too only I think everything was rushed from start to finish. A person might have throught the judge's pants were on fire he was rushing so fast. I remember hearing about jury selection and how hurried it was. Seems like everyone and anyone was selected with his approval. I wondered if Baes wouldn't have used that for a re-trial if he had lost. Now I just wish the media would forget about Casey Anthony. I'm so sick of them having to examine every single thing she might do or is doing. If she hadn't murdered Caylee no one would even know her name! And she's proud of being well known...loves all the attention and the press is sure feeding the witch,

 

[MissJames]

I'm watching the verdict from the Tommy Carleton trial (recorded) on InSession and after the verdict of guilty was read the defense asked that the jury be polled. Each juror was asked if this was their vote and did they feel threatened or coerced into making that vote.

I recall each juror being asked if this was their vote ,in the Anthony trial ,but were they asked if they felt coerced?
I was in shock and may have missed it.
Either way they now get a -10 from me .

 

[runsdeep]

I'm watching the verdict from the Nichol's trial (recorded) on InSession and after the verdict of guilty was read the defense asked that the jury be polled. Each juror was asked if this was their vote and did they feel threatened or coerced into making that vote.

I recall each juror being asked if this was their vote ,in the Anthony trial ,but were they asked if they felt coerced?
I was in shock and may have missed it.
Either way they now get a -10 from me.

someone here can pull up the exact wording, but yes they clarified every verdict.