Dignity4Victims
"Miss Anthony and the truth are strangers" - Judge
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Messages
- 1,179
- Reaction score
- 0
Ahhh, I thought maybe there was another way to do it other than uploading it to PB.
Thanks for that!
( I hope this is not in the wrong place) I have to say I admire your sand for sticking with this trial. I've not missed one minute of it up until about two sessions ago for the simple fact that I'm so emotionally involved that I don't want to get let down if/likely when this jury hangs. If it weren't for Juror four I'd bet my paycheck the jury would come back with a verdict of felony murder one - but frankly she scares me and from what I have heard I don't believe she's going to vote on anything but aquittal for the simple fact she stated that it is NOT her place to judge.
But here is my question: Assuming a mistrial or hung jury, can the state use any/all the defense statements/experts/defense against them or can the defense get all new experts, attorneys, a whole new defense, etc...? Anyone know?
I think she also factored in that duct tape was on Caylee's face - which there never should be on a child face. Am I remembering correctly?
JMO
I don't think they will. Tracey was corresponding by mail with Casey in jail as if they were BFF, and IIRC putting $$ in her commissary account :sick:
I'm not her, but perhaps she couldn't because of the whole chicken and the egg thingy. Which came first...death from chloroform...or death from asphyxiation...meaning was there enough chloroform to sedate Caylee...or too much that killed her...or was it more likely that both contributed to her death...which explains her labeling Caylee's death a homicide...however, without being able to test blood and examine body parts she couldn't conclusively state the means.
I always wondered why the State went with both...I think I understand now.![]()
I totally fail to understand WHY a juror who states she is "unable to judge" would be permitted to sit on a jury. Isn't that the PURPOSE of a jury to JUDGE guilt or innocence? Jurors have to JUDGE the validity of the evidence, the veracity of testimony, etc.
My understanding is that alternates are chosen to be able to replace jurors who cannot do their job. If she is truly "unable to judge" than she would be unable to judge either innocence OR guilt. I don't think the statement applies only to her not being able to assess guilt. So therefore, IMO, if she cannot do the job of a juror, she should be replaced before deliberations begin.
I'm not her, but perhaps she couldn't because of the whole chicken and the egg thingy. Which came first...death from chloroform...or death from asphyxiation...meaning was there enough chloroform to sedate Caylee...or too much that killed her...or was it more likely that both contributed to her death...which explains her labeling Caylee's death a homicide...however, without being able to test blood and examine body parts she couldn't conclusively state the means.
I always wondered why the State went with both...I think I understand now.![]()
You know, I sat thinking the other night about this. I am so very emotionally wrapped up in this...I told my daughter I don't know what I would do if ICA is found not guilty. I don't mean I would do something drastic...but it will be a huge blow. I'm not so sure my involvement in this case is healthy at this point, but I can't stop.
Why does ICA look so happy while on trial for killing her daughter? Go figure. JMO
She could have drawn the same conclusion to determine the cause of death. She ruled out accidental already . That means to find the cause of death on the homicide victim she could have compared other homicde victims who have no findings of trama and did her data comparison to those victims to support her conclusions of homicide by asphyxiation. Which I think would have been very important for her to try and do. I just want to know why she didnt.
I think she also factored in that duct tape was on Caylee's face - which there never should be on a child face. Am I remembering correctly?
JMO
I hope you are correct, I didn't give it much thought until JC and NG started in on the point that she ONLY takes notes during the defense...
Wow, we go on an on about this juror! What the jury said at jury selection is that she does not like to judge someone from the gossip she hears. But she can if she hears/finds out facts for herself. She didn't say she couldn't judge someone ever! :maddening:
Yes and the garbage bags which may have caused suffocation. So she couldn't determine 100% how Caylee died but definitely a homicide.
Going to tell you what I remember - other poster help if I am not accurate.
JB said in his opening that George came walking out to Casey with a drowned Caylee in his arms.
JB did not indicate if Caylee was at the bottom of the pool or floating. He did not say if George was wet or dry.
JB plays fast and loose - yesterday he responded to something the state said with a response of "I never said what time she drowned".
Many posters have said if Caylee was found immediately after drowning she would have been at the bottom of the pool.
Hope this helps a bit!
How does a ME determine asphyxiation when the body is skeletonized? It's not like a gun shot wound and you would see a bullet hole.
As has been mentioned before, she only thinks 10 mins at a time.
But, watch her when she stands for the Jury. She has such a guilty, sullen look, that if she was in a line-up, of a "who done it" group, you would pick her out instantly.
Like they are saying, "She is testifying with her mannerisms"
I really do not mean to be a pain.
She could have said suffocation to cover both the bags and the duct tape. Maybe even the Chloroform. If chloroform staves air from the body , I dont know.