How could they have a reasonable doubt as to whether Caylee was in the care and control of <that woman> on the day she was "dropped off with the nanny" or even drowned in the pool? (I don't believe the accidental drowning, but apparently they put stock in it). Really? I will always believe that the opening statement by the defense was what that jury heard and believed because of the graphic and completely not proven sexual abuse statements. IMO, they only clung to things that supported that theory, and nothing else. Hence, they disregarded the judge's instructions and decided to use River Cruz's testimony as material to what happened to Caylee. Not the only instructions they didn't follow, but it all goes back to that opening statement. :twocents:
right and if the supposed reason of casey partying behavior was due to the sexual abuse , and there was no evidence of the abuse that JB was not even allowed to bring it up in the closing staement , then how then do you explain away the behavior
its maddening