2011.07.08 - Dateline NBC

[eljay]

This young alternate juror is unbelievable. I think he was totally taken by our Miss Casey.

Sounds to me he was more interested in Casey's hitting him up when she got out.

You know what's kind of funny? JVM was interviewing people on the street about their feelings on the verdict. Every single one of the young men she asked were pro-KC!

 

[Chilly Willy]

Continuing to use the word MELT won't make the duct tape melt. The temperaures in the trunk or swamp don't get high enough to melt Henkel High Temp duct tape.

Besides that, the tape itself shows no sign of melting - like drips, or gooey stretching.

I agree, the duct tape would not 'melt' however if you've ever tried to remove duct tape that's stuck to a plastic bag, you'd know that it's not possible. I think that's what the poster means by "melt" the tape and the plastic basically fuse. Even in water I believe the plastic would stick to the tape, protecting the adhesive from water.

 

[Chilly Willy]

I find it interesting that both the jurors and the alternate jurors we've heard from so far tend to use the same phrases, such as KC was a 'good mom' and George was 'evasive' and 'combative'. Seems too contrived. Looks like they got their stories straight.

These people 'pre-deliberated' in the comfort of their hotel rooms.

Did they really expect George to be charming and cooperative when he was being accused of molesting his daughter and hiding his granddaughter's body?

If he hadn't been evasive and combative they'd have accused him of not being upset at those accusations, and therefore the accusations must be true......:banghead:

 

[dvdman]

Okay now I'm convinced the prosecution never had a chance with these geniuses on the Jury. Come on now "Casey was a good mother?". Oh yeah good mothers don't report their kids missing for over 31 days but wait it wasn't her but her MOM who made her report it!

 

[katydid23]

I really don't want to speak negatively of the jurors, as we do not know them personally, however, each time they make statements explaining why they came to their decision of "not guilty" of the major charges, I am left with the obvious conclusion that they must not retained critical points of the 6 week testimony, and chose not to review it for whatever reason-for example: one juror on dateline last night stated that there was no DNA and no stain in the trunk-I remember pretty concrete testimony showing that any DNA that would been present after the crime occurred would have degraded/decomposed in the trunk over the 31+ days until the car was inspected. Compounds consistent with decomposition were left behind-did they listen to hours of testimony of Dr Vass, as I did? Did they listen to all of the witnesses describing the smell in the trunk that was not trash (mind you there was no food in the bag). The bodily fluids continued to decompose in the trunk when they left Caylee's body-destroying any DNA that would have been present. Remember-heat facilitates and speeds this process up. The remains and items with the remains (duct tape) were exposed to the elements that destroy DNA-Heat and Water! Juror # 3 stated the pros never explained how/where the chloroform could have been applied-she speculated-in the car, at a public place? I remember specific evidence the pros showed that yes, Casey left the house on that fateful day, but the cell phone records show she had gone back home when George left for at least 4 hrs. I wonder if we were watching the same trial. Did anyone listen to Dr G? I could go on, but it is obvious to me that the jury did what the pros asked them to do-use their common sense. However, they tried to make common sense of how this pretty young mother could have done this and did not use common sense with the evidence-which is what they were supposed to do. You cannot make any sense out of Casey and her actions, b/c nothing she does makes sense. I have to accept this verdict b/c it is over and I am really trying.

One of the young male juror alternates said that he watched Casey and her body language, and " SHE SEEMED SINCERE." The biggest liar I have ever seen in my life and this guy says she seemed SINCERE. I do not get it. I think he is too young to understand that mothers DO kill their children. He just assumed that as he said ' She looked like a regular 22 yr old girl' and she seemed sincere.

Meanwhile he thought George seemed COMBATIVE when Baez questioned him. Did this kid understand that Baez was trying to prove that George was a rapist and possibly a murderer? Would that have something to do with George's demeanor?

This kid LOVED Baez's 'STYLE' and like that he was not like what you would think a lawyer would be. Ok. So according to the juror Baez was cool, Casey was SINCERE and George was combative. Ok then...NOT GUILTY all the way around.

 

[LambChop]

I have doubts as to whether the duct tape ever covered her mouth and nose, so I can't say whether this was ever an accident that was made to look like a murder.

I think when you look at the tape pulled apart you could probably come to that conclusion. But remember the juror's saw the skull and where the tape was placed at the scene. It was photographed from different directions. We know for a fact that one piece held the mandible in place and kept it from separating from the skull (which is pretty much what happened to the jaw when Dr. Spitz lifted the sample skull up to show to the jury after unlocking the jawbone from the skull, kerplunk). This happened right there in front of the jury and apparently it was lost on them. The other two pieces were layered one on top of the other. It's not hard to visualize that the tape was across the face and it should never have been on the face to begin with. Since we have not seen the pictures we can choose to not believe CSI, ME and LE who have all testified to what they witnessed. Interestingly there was a fourth piece of duct tape, also not stuck to the bag, decomposed, no glue, no white cotton threads (all gone) that was found near portions of Caylee's skeletal remains. This piece appears to have been attached to a portion of her body which was drug away by the animals. All the bones were together (such as left arm bones in one area).

At some point in time someone will sit down and read all the reports, go over all the pictures, talk to many of the people who worked tirelessly to retrieve as many bones as they could so nothing of Caylee would be left out in that swamp. And this person will write a story and we will once and for all know, without any reasonable doubt, exactly what happened to Caylee Marie Anthony and why. Now that is a book I would read. jmo

 

[Lovejac]

I don't know if this has been posted. You can watch this online
Dateline NBC: News stories about crime, celebrity and health

Thank you! I really wanted to see this.

 

[cluciano63]

To me this trial reveals, if anything, that sequestration of the jurors may not work any longer, if it ever did. Many think these jurors were together without a guard much of the time and if they were, then there was no point in keeping them from the media and their homes in the first place. That is a system failure, if it happened. I was under the impression that jurors were guarded and watched 24/7 while under sequestration but if that is not the case, then why bother with this huge expense, not to mention any feelings of resentment that may occur?

 

[LambChop]

I agree, the duct tape would not 'melt' however if you've ever tried to remove duct tape that's stuck to a plastic bag, you'd know that it's not possible. I think that's what the poster means by "melt" the tape and the plastic basically fuse. Even in water I believe the plastic would stick to the tape, protecting the adhesive from water.

Hey....I think you owe me a Coke. I don't like coke. Do you have root beer? lol

 

[dvdman]

To be quite honest with you I don't need to read a book to know what happened. Bottom line is she was murdered by and only by her mother Casey Marie Anthony. Despite the ludicrous "verdict" that cloud of obvious guilt will ALWAYS hang over her head until the day she is no longer on this Earth.

 

[dvdman]

Well it worked just fine in the Scott Peterson case but they didn't have "Fab 12 From Pinellas Jurors" on that Jury....thank goodness.

To me this trial reveals, if anything, that sequestration of the jurors may not work any longer, if it ever did. Many think these jurors were together without a guard much of the time and if they were, then there was no point in keeping them from the media and their homes in the first place. That is a system failure, if it happened. I was under the impression that jurors were guarded and watched 24/7 while under sequestration but if that is not the case, then why bother with this huge expense, not to mention any feelings of resentment that may occur?

 

[Chilly Willy]

Hey....I think you owe me a Coke. I don't like coke. Do you have root beer? lol

No Coke, Pepsi.

No fries, chips.

 

[MarthaM]

One thing I think we need to remember about all of these post-trial interviews, whether with jurors or lawyers or witnesses, is that they are edited. We are not seeing all of a person's responses or all of the questions asked, and they're rarely live and aired in their entirety. We may even see an interviewee's answer without knowing what specific question he/she was responding to. We see little sound bites. It's all edited, pieced together so that the program showing it can get in what they think will be most likely to interest their audience and get people talking.

So while these snippets of interviews might be interesting, they don't paint a completely clear picture for me.

 

[StealthTheory]

You know what's kind of funny? JVM was interviewing people on the street about their feelings on the verdict. Every single one of the young men she asked were pro-KC!

I've seen that to be true first hand except for young men or men at all with children. If they have kids her looks have no affect on them.

 

[Pollywog]

The jurors just did not get what they were supposed to do. I remember the nursing student or maybe it was the 1st alternate that spoke said they were all getting together next Friday. Is that normal for jurors to get together after a trial? It just sounded weird to me. I resent this jury because they did not pay attention. Maybe they could not prove how she died, but dang it, you don't put duct tape on a child if it is an accident, you don't put them in a bag and toss them out if an accident. If this were truly an accident and GA helped dispose of the body, it would never have been duct taped and she would not have been tossed out like that. IMO had GA had anything to do with it, the baby would have been buried some place and most likely in the yard. Maybe it was an accident, but if it was, why go to the trouble of duct tape, trash bags and leaving her in the trunk until the smell is that bad?

IMO it was not an accident, KC was the only one responsible and when GA wanted his gas cans she freaked, cussed him out and dumped her baby that day.

<modsnip>.

 

[LambChop]

The adhesive portion was no longer connected to the backside tape itself--correct?

And there were no rips, or tears or marks on the bags showing there was ever tape on there--correct?

When I say melt, I mean that the thin plastic garbage bag material would stick and become one with the strong adhesive after 6 months of intense heat. imoo

Have you ever tried to tear duct tape off of a plastic bag after it has been in the sun for 6 months?

The black bags were torn from the bottom which it's believed was from animal's ripping at the bags, pieces torn off. One edge appears to be totally ripped away. There is no tape on the opening, no tape in the middle portion and no tape residue appears to be on the bags whatsoever.

The bags were in evidence if there were any doubt about the tape first being on the bag and float to the face there was nothing there. I would think they would have looked at the bags first hand. I would have pulled out that laundry bag, too. It appears that may be the jurors just could not get past the sexual abuse allegations. Because if you put that aside in your mind and accept the fact that KC has already lied to police, you have to accept the fact that her father may be telling the truth. (someone is lying)

RC lied to LE. And there you have it. JB claims GA disposed of the body and the only person who would know that for sure was KC who they know lied to LE. RC was put on stand to discredit GA's testimony. We know for a fact she lied to LE but yet it's GA the jury does not believe. Plus her testimony about what exactly he said about the accident was so confusing I would have asked to see the transcript to read over again. We know that was not done because they would have had to ask the judge to get it. Oye, only in America.

 

[katydid23]

One thing I think we need to remember about all of these post-trial interviews, whether with jurors or lawyers or witnesses, is that they are edited. We are not seeing all of a person's responses or all of the questions asked, and they're rarely live and aired in their entirety. We may even see an interviewee's answer without knowing what specific question he/she was responding to. We see little sound bites. It's all edited, pieced together so that the program showing it can get in what they think will be most likely to interest their audience and get people talking.

So while these snippets of interviews might be interesting, they don't paint a completely clear picture for me.

I have seen some pretty extensive 'talking' with no cuts. For example on Nightline, the lady juror spoke for quite some time, answering extensively, no interruptions, no cutting and editing. And it made her look sketchy, imo. She contradicted herself and sounded very confused.

And that makes me angry because they should not be 'confused.' They had a responsibility to deliberate, look into facts they were unsure about, and delve into anything that was 'confusing.' If they reached this verdict on day 3 or 4 then I would be respectful of their decision. But they deliberated about 7 hours if you subtract the lunch hours. That was not enough because the ones I have heard interviewed have said things that go against the jury instructions. But whatever. The Lord works in mysterious ways. I think Casey Marie is in for a rude awakening if she thinks she is going to waltz her way into La Bella Vita.

 

[cluciano63]

Well it worked just fine in the Scott Peterson case but they didn't have "Fab 12 From Pinellas Jurors" on that Jury....thank goodness.

As far as I know, the SP jury was sequestered only during deliberations.

 

[LambChop]

To me this trial reveals, if anything, that sequestration of the jurors may not work any longer, if it ever did. Many think these jurors were together without a guard much of the time and if they were, then there was no point in keeping them from the media and their homes in the first place. That is a system failure, if it happened. I was under the impression that jurors were guarded and watched 24/7 while under sequestration but if that is not the case, then why bother with this huge expense, not to mention any feelings of resentment that may occur?

What could be worse than being locked up and feeling you no longer have freedom to do as you want? They even took their TV away from them for the last week. No wonder they did not want to say. These people had no choice but to bond and operate as one complete unit. This is why there was no real jury deliberation, IMO. A jury is suppose to function as a group but also in forming their opinions they should be doing so individually. If they all seem to be on the same page and came come to a verdict easily, understanding the evidence, then the system works. This did not work well at all. I'm guessing the people not talking on this jury are the very ones who may have felt overpowered by the others. Not that this happened but they clearly did not understand the evidence presented to them, did not follow the court's orders and wanted to get out of town asap. That much we do know.

I do agree and maybe this jury needs to be studied because if there were ever a clear indication sequestration does not work...this is it. jmo

 

[kolokolo]

Was the young guy an alternate? I didn't hear for sure. He said that she seemed like a normal girl her age, that he didn't see a lot of abnormal partying. He did say that he liked Baez because he wasn't the typical attorney. He liked his presentation style. :waitasec: He said that he understood she liked to go out but that her parents stepped in for that - big problem there for not introducing evidence that showed it was a problem between Cindy and Casey.

The juror did not trust George either, found him evasive. I think he said that he didn't believe the abuse allegation, but he did say once you hear something it is in your head.

Sounds to me this alternate thought Baez was the better storyteller, even though I believe it was all made up. Baez talked about fantasy evidence in his closing, talk about fantasy:sick: