2011.07.03 Sidebar Thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
So what is CM up to?

Not sure- Can he say anything about all the motions for dismissal they filed for lack of evidence?

I think he will pound on the charges and asking for the death penalty,
putting in the jurors heads that if they find ICA guilty, they may be
sentencing a possibly innocent ICA to death. yada,yada...
Remember he's the Against the Death Penalty person on the DT.

annd....Beyond ALL reasonable doubt, over and over........ JMO

B.Sheaffer just agreeing with my guess that verdict probably
would be Thursday. based on so much physical evidence introduced?
 
JB, no evidence of abuse? Thanks to caylee being thrown in a swamp and decompsed, we will never see her skin to see if there were bruises.

I tuned out fairly early in JB closing ... he made no sense, rambled and acted like we should be in awe of him. I really think he thinks he is great and coming across as a great speaker. He messed up the closing so bad that nothing he can say will correct it. It was a total embarressment and if any of the TH says he is great, then they are goofs also.

He got dates wrong, testimony wrong, words wrong, tie and pocket square wrong. He was pompous, condesending, rude, crass and ineffecticee
 
Bill Shaeffer said those talking heads/lawyers that have been in the court room say 1 day for a verdict. He thinks 3 or 4.

He thinks even if they take a straw poll and agree they will still go through the evidence.

I disagree. I think 2 days max.
 
How lovely of my extended family to have our annual 4th gathering YESTERDAY. I heart them.


:)
 
Even abused children love their mothers so his continued assertions that ICA was a good mother and there is no evidence of abuse because Caylee loved her mother is not necessary going to sway anyone.

Yes, that. Also, how can Jose argue that someone certainly would have noticed and reported if Caylee had been abused when he contends that his client, Casey, was sexually abused her entire childhood and no one noticed?

As usual, he's blowing holes in his own theory.
 
As an aside, I just wish the jury knew had badly Casey stole from everyone. Period. The lying and the stealing, the stealing especially for me, shows she has zero remorse for her grifting ways.

I think the SA got it in indirectly:

A) They made it clear ICA had not worked in two years

B) Then, they showed video after video after video of ICA shopping at Target, Penny's, etc.

Also, the defense oped the door for the SA to question the deputy about putting ICA in cuffs initially om July 15 because CA accused her of stealing a credit card (because CA was doing everything she could to get ICA to tell where Caylee was).
 
Anyone think the DT's strategy is to make the jury feel sorry for ICA because she has such a bad, discombobulated attorney?

I'm just going to have to retrieve my question at the beginning of this circus where I asked if JB is deliberately trying to cause a mistrial, appeal or whatever due to his incompetence. Some people said that he wouldn't deliberately damage his career like that and sacrifice himself to ICA.
 
I have a question: I loved Jeff Ashton's closing argument. I am wondering whether the State will talk about the 16th of June in more detail. Cell phone pings, what she did all day etc..
 
Even Sonny on HLN saying JB closing very painful to listening to.
Interesting. I find his closing just as disjointed and unorganized as his opening statement. IIRC, it was Sonny who said that Baez's opening statement was "brilliant.":crazy:
 
Do you think they will put up a picture of Caylee and /or play the You Are My Sunshine video at end?

I really think they need pics of little Caylee... Just put the focus back on the little one and not her henious MOTHER
 
VP bringing up a good point that JB said in his opening that Caylee drowned. Now he is saying there is no evidence of how she died.
HHJP heard arguments this morning on what could and could not be included in closing arguments. HHJP asked JB to give him all the evidence that supported the theories of sexual abuse of ICA. Then, after hearing that, HHJP decided AS A MATTER OF LAW, that there was no evidence of sexual abuse and thus prohibited that as a legally improper argument. Reasonable doubt cannot have a foundation of pure speculation and pie in the sky theories. It must be supported by evidence. For an attorney to make an argument that is not based on ANY evidence is legally improper and prohibited. So, HHJP told JB that any arguments asserting sexual abuse were forbidden. Since that was a lynch pin of JB's case, he had to back off. He is now mainly arguing against the prosecution's case in chief -- attacking the evidence. Thus he is arguing they don't know HOW Caylee died. However, that sort of concedes that they know WHO was responsible, doesn't it? IMHO, that's a big mistake because nothing in the law requires the prosecution to prove HOW the victim died. A homicide case is all about WHO did it.
 
WOW RR...I did not notice that writing initially..now that is really really CREEPY:sick:

thats the writing from the board JB made - not something associated with the year book photo
 
Max 3 more hours of the DT blah blah blahing, oh happy daze. :)
 
Can someone tell me when those friends were in the Pontiac, and why didn't Linda object to the dates??
 
Bill S talked about timer55 and I too was very impressed with JA when he said that

okay I was impressed with everything JA said
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
94
Guests online
2,049
Total visitors
2,143

Forum statistics

Threads
599,867
Messages
18,100,478
Members
230,942
Latest member
Patturelli
Back
Top