2011.07.08 - Dateline NBC

[katydid23]

When is the next group of jurors coming out? Or are they busy hiring attorneys?

They are busy hiring publicists and talent Agents.

 

[Etiana]

Well, they can continue to go on all these shows and try to justify what they did,but with every sentence that comes out of each of their mouths,it's clear they did not do what jurors are supposed to do . They will forever be known as the jury who let a baby killer off. Had they deliberated for a few more days I think there would be less suspicion about their actions,but it's clear they went in knowing how they would vote and didn't bother to look at anything . JMO

I'm so in agreement with everything you guys are saying tonight! The more the jurors talk, the bigger the hole gets. You know, I might be able to reconcile some of what they're saying if they deliberated for longer but the more I hear, the more I think they didn't even go over things in any kind of detail.

 

[katydid23]

Well, they can continue to go on all these shows and try to justify what they did,but with every sentence that comes out of each of their mouths,it's clear they did not do what jurors are supposed to do . They will forever be known as the jury who let a baby killer off. Had they deliberated for a few more days I think there would be less suspicion about their actions,but it's clear they went in knowing how they would vote and didn't bother to look at anything . JMO

I was not upset with the jury at the start of this chapter. I assumed they decided that state did not meet their burden. I was concerned they decided so quickly, but IF one of them had given a cohesive intelligent explanation then no problem. That is the way our system works, end of story.

But ALL 3 of the ones I have seen interviewed have said MORONIC things. And all three have shown that they bought the DT Opening statement as FACT. Meanwhile they say there is nothing to the 31 days, or the smell in the trunk, and NO evidence of a cause of death. YET they discuss the accidental drowning and sexual abuse AS IF it were a factor. IMO they listened to the Opening Statements, then zoned out between the dessert lady and the special
events they enjoyed so much.

It is kind of frustrating except I am getting used to the idea that Casey Marie Anthony is going to go out and conquer the world now, victorious and proud. I am kind of looking forward to it.

 

[Zoe Bogart]

I do not understand how people keep ignoring the abuse and neglect that was testified to. Casey had no job, she lied about that, so she STOLE from friends and family instead. Isn't that a form of child neglect?

And she snuck around all day and night PRETENDING to be at the nanny's or at work and she was dragging her toddler along with her. There was testimony that she was hanging around late night college parties with drinking and smoking, pot included. She would be out in another room to try and sleep there. She was alone on a balcony at least once we heard of. She answered an apt door ALL ALONE while Casey was in the bedroom with Tony.THAT is very dangerous.
She slept in bed BETWEEN casey and her boyfriend Ricardo for a few weeks. THAT IS CHILD ABUSE, imo. And what sex abuse victim does that to her child?

That child should have had a stable, child friendly routine. She should have had little friends and been going to the park tp play. NOT sitting in the car and waiting for her grandparents to leave so Casey could sneak back home every day.

Casey was a TERRIBLE mother and I am surprised this jury keeps parroting how she was such a 'good mother.' Just because she dragged her to Tony's and PRETENDED she was a doting mother does not make it so.

We heard this but the jurors must have been on Planet Baez. Of course it was child abuse! Having a child share a bed with the mother and her boyfriend IS abuse, and one of the worst kinds.

Listening to these jurors lets us know they were thinking over about what Baez said and what her friends said, her friends who barely knew her! They listened to nothing else, and what little they heard from the prosecution, they tossed it.

How could they say they couldn't make a decision without cause of death and motive? Judge Perry told them NOT to consider either!!! The more these jurors talk the worse it sounds. Justice was NOT served.

 

[Talina]

Now that several jurors have spoken out about not having motive or cause of death as a big part of their decision, coupled with at least one saying they could not forget Baez accusing George of molestation, I have to wonder what Judge Perry thinks when he hears this, if he has seen any of these interviews.

IMO

 

[Tulessa]

[ame="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032600/vp/43691488#43691488"]Dateline NBC: News stories about crime, celebrity and health[/ame]

Tonight's video.

 

[Etiana]

I was not upset with the jury at the start of this chapter. I assumed they decided that state did not meet their burden. I was concerned they decided so quickly, but IF one of them had given a cohesive intelligent explanation then no problem. That is the way our system works, end of story.

But ALL 3 of the ones I have seen interviewed have said MORONIC things. And all three have shown that they bought the DT Opening statement as FACT. Meanwhile they say there is nothing to the 31 days, or the smell in the trunk, and NO evidence of a cause of death. YET they discuss the accidental drowning and sexual abuse AS IF it were a factor. IMO they listened to the Opening Statements, then zoned out between the dessert lady and the special
events they enjoyed so much.

Yup, me too! I know I shouldn't but I'm starting to feel like they took advantage of Judge Perry's kindness. It's petty of me to think this way but I can't help it. All the time I was thinking that they saw right through Baez and ICA and nothing could be further from the truth

I want to feel like justice was served, I really do but the more I hear from the jury, the madder I become.

 

[katydid23]

So MUCH evidence...so little time.

And as Juror #3 said; the chloroform thing 'was just confusing.'

Okay, did they ask any questions---ask to listen to any of the witness testimony--ask the judge about anything that might clarify it?

I mean if you say one of the MAIN elements of the states case was 'confusing'---then imo--you would be expected to ask questions to clear it up. But she SHRUGGED IT OFF. That is how my daughter flunked her first semester of Freshman algebra. She said it was 'confusing' and just shrugged it off, hoping it would clear up on it's own. Of course she ended up in summer school to figure it out. Too bad gthe jurors didn't show that much effort.

 

[Zoe Bogart]

My ignore list is growing like a field of weeds !

I can't figure out how to ignore certain things. Can anyone help? I don't see anything to click that says "Ignore". I do see the "Alert" button but that won't do. Help!

 

[DairyGirl]

When is the next group of jurors coming out? Or are they busy hiring attorneys?

No, they are hiring publicists, so they can get as much money as possible for their "story".

 

[MarthaM]

And as Juror #3 said; the chloroform thing 'was just confusing.'

Okay, did they ask any questions---ask to listen to any of the witness testimony--ask the judge about anything that might clarify it?

A judge can't clarify testimony for a jury. They can ask to have certain testimony re-read, but I understood Juror #3 to mean that she found the prosecution's use of that testimony to be confusing. I didn't get the impression that the testimony itself confused her, but rather what the prosecution was using it for. They didn't tie it all together very well.

 

[katydid23]

I didn't watch it but think I read maybe page 2 or 3 somebody said juror 2 said something about body language and watching Casey's. wouldn't that be a bit against the "rules"? Kind of like conducting your own investigation? To be honest its something that I would do, but if your basing a decision on body language then your way off. I think he was an alternate but is he an expert in body language?

He said he 'watched her body language ' AND SHE SEEMED SINCERE.'

She seemed SINCERE? The biggest liar most of us have ever heard of in our entire lives, and this guy thinks SHE SEEMS SINCERE?????????????????????

I just do not know what to think about these guys. Of all of the words to use to describe Casey Anthony, and he chooses SINCERE?:silenced:

 

[katydid23]

A judge can't clarify testimony for a jury. They can ask to have certain testimony re-read, but I understood Juror #3 to mean that she found the prosecution's use of that testimony to be confusing. I didn't get the impression that the testimony itself confused her, but rather what the prosecution was using it for. They didn't tie it all together very well.

I think they tied it together very well. But if she thought it was confusing she could have reread the pertinent testimony. She said there was no cause of death put forth, but in the next breath said the states discussion of chloroform was 'confusing.' So I think the jury had plenty of time to revisit anything they found confusing. Insteqad of just shrugging it off as unimportant.

Evidently at least one of the jurors said he could not unremember the sex abuse accusation. And he had no interest in the smell in the trunk or the 31 days of lying because that was just 'emotional' stuff. But the sex abuse claims, that was too hard to shake.

 

[laserdisc10]

Now that several jurors have spoken out about not having motive or cause of death as a big part of their decision, coupled with at least one saying they could not forget Baez accusing George of molestation, I have to wonder what Judge Perry thinks when he hears this, if he has seen any of these interviews.

IMO

Hard to say what JP is thinking

Maybe for him, it's just par for the course. Not his first rodeo, he says, and surely not the first time he's had to sit and watch trials go south

On the other hand, he might be reassuring his family that thank goodness he'll soon be out of it and away from the craziness of society -- free to play golf with people of his choosing and his intellectual level

 

[laserdisc10]

I think they tied it together very well. But if she thought it was confusing she could have reread the pertinent testimony. She said there was no cause of death put forth, but in the next breath said the states discussion of chloroform was 'confusing.' So I think the jury had plenty of time to revisit anything they found confusing. Insteqad of just shrugging it off as unimportant.

Evidently at least one of the jurors said he could not unremember the sex abuse accusation. And he had no interest in the smell in the trunk or the 31 days of lying because that was just 'emotional' stuff. But the sex abuse claims, that was too hard to shake.

Personally, I believe jury members heard what they wanted to hear -- cherry-picked the evidence to suit what they wanted to believe -- delivered a verdict which was a measure of their own superficial values

 

[yosande]

Not sure if any of you watched the 2nd case on dateline, about the girl in north carolina...wow. Now THAT case was full of reasonable doubt. Much, much less evidence and there was still a guilty verdict. Week long trial, 5 hour deliberations. You do the math. If this were casey's jury they would have deliberated about 30 hours.

I have to wonder if the 6 that voted guilty at the beginning were bullied into voting not guilty, b/c I don't know how you can go from g to ng. I can see how you could go from ng to g though.

Can you imagine being stuck in a room with people who have holiday plans, and want to go home trying to make you feel stupid for thinking she's guilty?

I'll give on the she's young and parties, but what happened to "why" did she lie to LEO, and why did she not report her daughter missing, and why did the trunk stink so bad, and why was Caylee found ten houses down from home?

And who else had opportunity to the trunk of the car, and Caylee?
Why was it not considered when the last time she was seen to the video in blockbuster when the DT admitted Caylee died on the 16th, only hours before?

Did the jury think they would profit from a not guilty verdict with more publicity, book writing? Is no one just simply strong and honest anymore?

Could Perry have overturned the jurys' verdict?

Nothing good is going to come from this verdict. Nothing. moo

It simply comes down to lying to LE and why, which LE did ask her?
Why are you lying about everything. Her answer, her mother would never forgive her.....

 

[katydid23]

In an exclusive interview with ABCs Nightline, Jennifer Ford, 32, juror #3 on the Casey Anthony trial, asked this and many other questions regarding the prosecution's case against Anthony. The nursing student said that the initial vote by the jury was 10-2 to acquit on first degree murder. But, some jurors, she said, didn’t believe Anthony had done anything at all.
=====================================================

SO TWO JURORS INITIALLY VOTED YES ON 1st DEGREE MURDER?????
=====================================================

Cause of death was a major stumbling block for the jury. “I have no idea. They didn’t even paint a picture for me to consider,” she stated in an interview with Terry Moran about the prosecution’s attempt to show the jury how baby Caylee Anthony died. The chloroform evidence presented meant nothing but confusion to Ford. “I can walk from here to there and make it happen,” she said of the defense’s theory of an accidental death by drowning in the family pool. “With the chloroform, I’m all over the place. … I don’t know where I’m at. … A to B to C. … I can’t make it work.”

====================================================

[So it was easier to just go with the DT OS then...]


The 31 days of no report that her daughter was missing and partying was not significant, the juror said. “It looks very bad. The behavior is very bad. But, bad behavior is not enough to prove a crime. It’s not,” she said, reaffirming the sentiment.

George Anthony was a factor in the jury's decision, she said. “Because he was clearly dishonest. He was evasive,” she said, indicating that he switched from side to side. “He was being difficult,” she said, wondering why he could not just answer the questions asked of him. She also indicated that she felt he was involved in the crime in some way. “I think he was there,” she told Moran. But, she did say that the allegations of molestation were not a factor in the decision.===========================


SO SHE WAS CONVINCED GEORGE WAS THERE. ANY EVIDENCE TO BACK THAT UP?
No none. just Baez's word in the OS.


Ford’s statements were conflicting, seeming to agree that “something” was wrong, even indicating that she believed that Casey and George had covered something up; that some type of crime was committed; that she thought at some point the child probably needed medical care; and that the body may have been dumped in the swamp where it was found to cover up either an accident or a murder. But, although there was apparently enough evidence for her to draw a number of personal conclusions about the case, there was not enough for the jury as a whole, including Ford, to come to the conclusion of a guilty verdict on anything other than lying to law enforcement. Evidence that she was capable of murder was not significant, she indicated. “You’re covering up something,” she said. “It’s not proven that it is a murder.”

[OMG, this is so annoying. .]

http://www.huliq.com/10473/juror-3-casey-anthony-trial-speaks-abcs-nightline-video

 

[Talina]

I just watched the entire dateline episode on their website. All in all, they did a very good presentation.

My head was spinning, though, with the juror said that them considering her behavior during the 31 days would have been emotional and they weren't supposed to use their emotions in their decision. Hello? How is judging someone's behavior an emotional decision?

Jury instructions should include definitions and examples for "emotional decisions" and "deliberation". Two definitions that would have done well for these jurors to have heard and had in writing to refer to in the jury room. It should be on the wall in nice framed posters.

Some of the THs and reporters are saying that the general public needs to calm down and leave these jurors alone. I agree. They did their civic duty and they should be able to go back to live their lives without harassment or threats. However, the ones that do choose to go out and give interviews should not be surprised when they are questioned on how/why they arrived at the decision that they did. So far, I have not yet seen one reporter really ask pertinent questions or point out to any of them how wrong what some of them are saying is - such as when they say there was no motive or cause of death. The reporters just let them say this and then not say a word back or ask them did they not hear they are not to consider that in their deliberations.

The outcome of this trial and some of what these jurors are coming out and saying makes me even more determined to make sure I do not in any way try to ever get out of jury duty if I am ever called.

My brother once served on a jury that was a capital murder case. He ended up being selected to be the foreman. He told me that once back in the jury room they took an initial vote. All said guilty. Instead of immediately putting their decision on the verdict forms, my brother said they decided to go through all the testimony and evidence to make sure before they finalized their vote. They took 3 days. Then they voted again and the vote was still unanimous. I asked him would you have done the same thing if everyone said Not Guilty. He said yes. He said the state and the defense took the time to present their cases to us for over 3 weeks. The least we owed to both sides was to make sure we gave it the time and attention they all deserved to make the right decision. Too bad he wasn't on this jury.

IMO

 

[Hexxgurl311]

I also find it interesting that one of the jurors had a cruise on July 7 and they finished early afternoon July 5. Enough time to get home and pack and get ready for that nice vacation. Who cares if getting home on time meant they had to set a murderer free. If they found her guilty they would have had to stay there for the penalty phase. Just thinking about it makes me :furious:

 

[laserdisc10]

I have to wonder if the 6 that voted guilty at the beginning were bullied into voting not guilty, b/c I don't know how you can go from g to ng. I can see how you could go from ng to g though.

Can you imagine being stuck in a room with people who have holiday plans, and want to go home trying to make you feel stupid for thinking she's guilty?

I'll give on the she's young and parties, but what happened to "why" did she lie to LEO, and why did she not report her daughter missing, and why did the trunk stink so bad, and why was Caylee found ten houses down from home?

And who else had opportunity to the trunk of the car, and Caylee?
Why was it not considered when the last time she was seen to the video in blockbuster when the DT admitted Caylee died on the 16th, only hours before?

Did the jury think they would profit from a not guilty verdict with more publicity, book writing? Is no one just simply strong and honest anymore?

Could Perry have overturned the jurys' verdict?

Nothing good is going to come from this verdict. Nothing. moo

It simply comes down to lying to LE and why, which LE did ask her?
Why are you lying about everything. Her answer, her mother would never forgive her.....

' Did the jury think '


There it is, in a nutshell



As with most, I'm not satisfied at all with the jury

not persuaded by their backside-saving post-trial excuses and rationalizations


To me ----- HINKY

Something has yet to be revealed about this entire farce

Hopefully, someone will eventually speak out

Until they do, the pieces of this puzzle aren't fitting - and nothing's making them fit, no matter how much spin is being applied