2011.07.08 - Dateline NBC

[GhostCrab]

I think In session's point was that typically there is a little more variety in terms of educational background on most juries. They really seemed to make a point of it. Hopefully education though does broaden your horizons, gives way to the practice of critical thinking and I think helps with the scientific part. But I agree with you that it is not the end all. I have know many people, as I'm sure you have, that do not have as education, who are smart and some, in reverse, that I can't figure out how they got that degree. Well, I think the purpose of"picking a part the jury" is becuase those of us who beleived the state proved its case, can't follow thier logic. And if the jury had found her guilty, I assume you would have thought the decision was also absurd.

Honestly, if they had come back with a guilty verdict, I would have been disappointed because I did not think that the state proved the case beyond a reasonable doubt, but I would have accepted it and not try to demean them because they didn't see what I saw. But again, I am not emotionally attached to the case which I think makes a huge difference between me and most of the people here on WS.

In fact, the reason that I came to WS in the first place is due to a recent case where I live in which a husband was convicted of killing his wife. I did not think that the state proved it's case there either (an opinion shared my many even some here on WS) but the jury found him guilty regardless. I didn't gnash my teeth and blame the jury....it is what it is.

 

[Hot Dogs]

Third, it could have just been taped to the canvas bag to close it.

That's not really possible. The canvas laundry bag had a round wire rim opening. This would cause it to be permanently open and tape could not close it. However, the black plastic trash bag(s) could have been taped.

 

[LancelotLink]

I tried google and found nothing. I would like to see the docs. TIA

http://orlandosentinel.image2.trb.com/orlnews/media/acrobat/2008-11/43228283.PDF

 

[SeaNymph]

I tried google and found nothing. I would like to see the docs. TIA

The actual reports are buried in the tens of thousands of pages of discovery, but this may be a good place to start digging. IIRC there were several DCF reports, not just this one.

http://www.acandyrose.com/caylee_anthony_recaps_112608docs(wesh).htm


Page 2313-2313: William Procknow, DCF Investigator, Case #2008-436727: (**NEW)
- 08/25/2008 William Procknow met with Casey Anthony at Anthony home
- William Procknow asked Casey why she needed a babysitter if she wasn't working.
- Casey told the DCF Investigator that she was employed at Universal Studios and that the police "had it wrong."
- William Procknow stated DCF report closing case with "verified findings of inadequate supervision and threatened harm."


(ETA: Pretty sure that's an approved link here at WS; if not, mods feel free to poof my post.)

 

[com n sense]

I think they wanted to believe JB. It was alot more work for them if they found her guilty. They would have had to actually go through evidence & a stack of paper work if the found her guilty. They were no doubt lazy & probably didn't understand how to fill out the guilty paper work.

 

[Chilly Willy]

Yes, this is closer to what the evidence actually showed than the generalization that there were three pieces of duct tape covering her mouth.

Since we aren't 100% sure of how she was murdered, are we to assume Caylee is not really dead? I hope the ME checked those bones for a pulse!

It really does not matter if the jury believed the tape was placed over Caylee's face or not. Not knowing exactly how Caylee died doesn't make Casey any less guilty.

 

[Chilly Willy]

I think they wanted to believe JB. It was alot more work for them if they found her guilty. They would have had to actually go through evidence & a stack of paper work if the found her guilty. They were no doubt lazy & probably didn't understand how to fill out the guilty paper work.

I have to disagree with you. I think it took a lot of effort for them to ignore all the evidence presented by the SA and accept all the various twisted and conflicting scenarios presented by Baez.

 

[GhostCrab]

Since we aren't 100% sure of how she was murdered, are we to assume Caylee is not really dead? I hope the ME checked those bones for a pulse!

It really does not matter if the jury believed the tape was placed over Caylee's face or not. Not knowing exactly how Caylee died doesn't make Casey any less guilty.

Since the PT put forth the theory that the duct tape was the murder weapon, it actually does matter.

 

[Hot Dogs]

First, the tape was not on the skull it was stuck in the hair.

Some hairs were adhered to tape. Tape also was adhered to mandible bone (jaw).

That tape was adhered to jaw bone is interesting. This means that tape ended up adhering to something which it wasn't originally attached to (unless you think it was placed on bone).

That could lead a person to speculate that the tape may not have been originally placed anywhere on the head or hair. Through detachment and shifting it ended up eventually adhering to hair and bone.

This conversation about crime scene forensics is probably better off in a different thread.

 

[Chilly Willy]

Wouldn't it be ironic if Cindy got 15 years for jury and her daughter 3 years for lying and murdering her baby? Geez, wonder if Casey would come to visit?
I truly believe Cindy should be charged. She helped set Casey free with obstruction and perjury throughout this whole sorted mess...

She threw so many innocent people under the bus i protect the monster she helped create. They are two peas from the same pod .....


Charleyann

I don't think it ultimately mattered whether Cindy lied on the stand or not. The jury was determined to ignore the evidence, toss aside logic and common sense, and set the murderer free. Cindy's testimony didn't affect that one way or the other.

 

[Misfitdolly]

Jeff Ashton also said that they could not verify the story of the fight the day before Caylee died.

The young male juror they had on said he felt ICA acted like a normal 23 year old. She wanted to party but her parents stepped in and watched Caylee. This is why it needed to be brought out that Cindy and George were not always available to watch Caylee and that Cindy didn't like ICA staying out late.

I don't think it was ever stated during the trial that her current boyfriend didn't want Caylee staying at the apartment. If it wasn't heard by the jurors it should have been.....this went to the root of the motive and seems to be 1 of the things the jurors felt was missing.

BBM ITA and also the fact that AL told Casey that he only wanted male babies. I keep thinking that maybe if these 2 things were testified to the outcome would have been different.

 

[Chilly Willy]

Since the PT put forth the theory that the duct tape was the murder weapon, it actually does matter.

I disagree. Even if there were NO murder weapon found at the scene where Caylee's remains were located, it's still apparent that Caylee was indeed murdered and that her mother is the murderer.

 

[JBounds]

I wouldn't be critical of this jury if the juror's that spoke so far wouldn't have been so contradictory in their statements. And if they had actually taken notes, looked over evidence one more time, read the instructions and asked questions. If they had and then came to the conclusion of"Not Guilty" then fine.

It is jury's like these who let people go such as Joshua Wade who killed a woman in Alaska, told two people about it and even showed them the woman's body telling them what he did. And that jury said he was not guilty, so guess what? He was let go and murdered again.

 

[GhostCrab]

I disagree. Even if there were NO murder weapon found at the scene where Caylee's remains were located, it's still apparent that Caylee was indeed murdered and that her mother is the murderer.

What's the point in having a justice system at all then?

 

[Phoebeb]

I am watching my recording of Dateline now. Wow, the alt juror just said about the duct tape smothering her,

"I, I couldn't see it. I, I, I just don't see- if they were gonna say the chloroform was to knock Caylee out and then suffocate her, I don't understand why they would use duct tape. It just didn't make sense."

Huh? Chloroform is used to knock her out, not to smother her. The tape prevents her from breathing. Hello?
Also this alt juror said there was blood or smell of decomp in the trunk of the car. Oh dear. He wanted to see blood for proof of suffocation.

 

[uklaw]

http://orlandosentinel.image2.trb.com/orlnews/media/acrobat/2008-11/43228283.PDF

Thanks for the DCFS records. When I read your original post I assumed you meant pre-death.

Do we know if DCFS (or whatever they are called in Florida) were ever called in prior to the death of Caylee.

 

[Chilly Willy]

What's the point in having a justice system at all then?

I don't understand your question. It seems to me that you believe no murderer should ever be convicted unless a certified video tape of the defendant committing the murder is admitted into evidence. Unfortunately, murderers take efforts to hide evidence of their crimes and it becomes the jury's job to use logic and common sense to determine guilt. It's not necessary to have every single piece of the puzzle in order to see the bigger picture.

 

[Chilly Willy]

I am watching my recording of Dateline now. Wow, the alt juror just said about the duct tape smothering her,

"I, I couldn't see it. I, I, I just don't see- if they were gonna say the chloroform was to knock Caylee out and then suffocate her, I don't understand why they would use duct tape. It just didn't make sense."

Huh? Chloroform is used to knock her out, not to smother her. The tape prevents her from breathing. Hello?
Also this alt juror said there was blood or smell of decomp in the trunk of the car. Oh dear. He wanted to see blood for proof of suffocation.

I've heard of many cases and even seen movies were duct tape was used as a murder weapon. I can't imagine what doesn't make sense about it or why the jury had such a hard time believing what they saw with their own eyes.

 

[GhostCrab]

No, not at all. But whe a PT puts forth the evidence and it does not support their theory then I think there should be a not guilty verdict regardless of one's emotions.

 

[Chilly Willy]

No, not at all. But whe a PT puts forth the evidence and it does not support their theory then I think there should be a not guilty verdict regardless of one's emotions.

While I saw the defense put forth all kinds of conflicting testimony and theories, I did not see that on the part of the prosecution. What evidence do you feel they presented that did not support their theory?