2011.07.11 Greta Van Sustern interview with Jury Foreperson

[rbrnmw2]

OMG this is getting more maddening every time one of those jurors open their mouth. I didn't watch it but just read the transcript. It's beyond any comprehension how these people could do this. I don't think the foreman was stupid I think the foreman was doing the job he set out to do before hearing any opening statement. I think that job was to acquit FCA no matter what. ~~MOO~~

 

[TxLady2]

Ummm, IIRC the case Judge Alex referred to was for a drug possession charge. Heck of a big difference, imo

Doesn't matter, that short amount of time wasn't even time enough to select a foreperson, much less discuss the evidence. I was on a jury for a case of indecency with a child and we deliberated for 5 hours, probably longer than it took the DA to present his case.
The point is, ten hours is a pretty long time if you are discussing anything, plus they had that night to individually think about it, then 5 or 6 more hours the next day.

 

[Italy]

And how many times did Linda say "Did you type how to make chloroform into the google search bar?"

Reasonable juror 11, Casey see's a cartoon about Chloroform and the next day she googles "HOW TO MAKE CHLOROFORM"

Where is the reasonable in that?

So this <modsnip> just ignored expert testimony about excessively high measurements of chloroform in the trunk? After looking up how to make chloroform, he didn't think it was weird that there were these high levels - testified to by experts and NEVER rebutted by defense?

I looked up how to make a cherry pie but, as a result, I don't think there is a high level of cherry juice in my trunk.

 

[sappysoul]

She should have been found guilty of manslaughter - not 1st degree. There was more evidence than just the chloroform in the car.

The FBI agent also so he was surprised to find chloroform due to the length of time and the fact the trunk lining had been in open air. The fact is the jury ignored or did not believe several witnesses who put a dead body in the trunk. So the fact GA acted suspicious on the stand overruled all the other evidence. I just don't see how anyone can defend that decision. There was no evidence of GA being involved but that went right over their collective empty head.

 

[Sammiejam]

I didnt watch the interview with the foreman (or any of them) because I just cant with these people.

I am upset and horrified. He SERIOUSLY thinks cindy did the chloroform searches???? And GEORGE is a shifty and a liar??? O.M.G

I have to go before I start acting a mess in here. I will put myself on a time out...

 

[Solange82200]

I don't think the jury heard anything about the dead squirrels, unless I missed it. As far as having suspicions about George, a number of people right here on WS had those same suspicions within the first year of this case, it was discussed at length, about both George and Lee. A lot of people wondered if one of them was the father of Caylee, and the FBI ran DNA analysis on both of them, but when Baez tried to bring that in, the state objected and it was ruled hearsay. There very rarely is any evidence of child molestation unless it's discovered and the child is taken to the hospital right then, or it's reported to DCF. I think there was a lot of things they never heard that people here know, and that is the problem. We are forgetting that they didn't follow this for 3 years, it was all new to them.
I agree with you on the manslaughter, though, it still puzzles me why they ignored the other charges except for the lying to LE.

Yes they did hear about the squirrels. It was pointed out to them again in closing statements, and Amy testified to it.

 

[MsRyber]

All I can say is that if Casey got off with the amount of circumstantial evidence against her, then Scott Peterson looks like an absolute SAINT.

 

[annalia]

I said I wasn't going to watch but gave in and now I'm sorry I did.

I am convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the jurors based their verdict on nothing but feelings and emotions.

What they didn't understand, they just dismissed outright, all because they were shocked by the DT opening. Casey didn't have the look of someone that would harm their child, George on the other hand had did.
They took speculations to a whole new level, putting it into almost every piece of evidence presented.

No one will convince me that those jurors who voted for either murder one or the six that voted for manslaughter were compelled to change their votes in such a short timeframe based on evidence presented at deliberations.

It's the jurors own words that convinced me. Something is rotten in Denmark but there's nothing that can reverse it, Casey is free and will stay that way unless she screws up again. I think right now the jurors are in CYA mode, but one day it will hit them like a ton of bricks.

 

[manatee]

Yes they did hear about the squirrels. It was pointed out to them again in closing statements, and Amy testified to it.

these jurors had no common sense at all. or if they have it they gave it up. we know Caylee was dead and found in plastic bags and laundry bag from the home. How in the world do they think she got there? Do they think GA carried her like a sac of potatoes down the street? we have a dead body and the smell of something terrible in the trunk of a car. what does that mean? :banghead::banghead:

 

[sappysoul]

Doesn't matter, that short amount of time wasn't even time enough to select a foreperson, much less discuss the evidence. I was on a jury for a case of indecency with a child and we deliberated for 5 hours, probably longer than it took the DA to present his case.
The point is, ten hours is a pretty long time if you are discussing anything, plus they had that night to individually think about it, then 5 or 6 more hours the next day.

Did you actually review any of the evidence? Any way you spin it this was a short deliberation considering the length of the trial and the amount of evidence. All the experts I heard said that as well. They obviously coulda shoulda reviewed the rebuttal testimony since they continued to believe Cindy did those searches. The fact is they didn't do any of that.

How can you say the differences between this trial and the trial on drug charges makes no difference? That makes absolutely no logical sense.

 

[goldenlover]

So this *** just ignored expert testimony about excessively high measurements of chloroform in the trunk? After looking up how to make chloroform, he didn't think it was weird that there were these high levels - testified to by experts and NEVER rebutted by defense?

I looked up how to make a cherry pie but, as a result, I don't think there is a high level of cherry juice in my trunk.

The defense did rebutt the chloroform, with the FBI crime lab expert, the one that the state chose not to put on the stand. He said the levels were not excessively high and that what was there could very possibly be from cleaning agents and other things.

 

[manatee]

I said I wasn't going to watch but gave in and now I'm sorry I did.

I am convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the jurors based their verdict on nothing but feelings and emotions.

What they didn't understand, they just dismissed outright, all because they were shocked by the DT opening. Casey didn't have the look of someone that would harm their child, George on the other hand had did.
They took speculations to a whole new level, putting it into almost every piece of evidence presented.

No one will convince me that those jurors who voted for either murder one of the six that voted for manslaughter were compelled to change their votes in such a short timeframe based on evidence presented at deliberations.

It's the jurors own words that convinced me. Something is rotten in Denmark but there's nothing that can reverse it, Casey is free and will stay that way unless she screws up again. I think right now the jurors are in CYA mode, but one day it will hit them like a ton of bricks.

I think you are so right! Jurors should have to have to do more than just write guilty or not guilty. Geez my 6 yr old could do that. I would expect that just like a world problem they should have to right out what evidence they used or did not use to come up with the verdict. It should not be as simple as a multiple choice test to pick between a or b. silly! :banghead:

 

[SongBird]

I still believe going against the grain...shocking outcome was viewed but this jury as the best way to be more wanted by the media for interviews...if the verdict was guilty...no one would really care what these 12 jurors would have to say because that was the verdict the majority expected!!!! I refuse to watch...after I heard juror number six got an agent the day after the verdict!!!! to me that is telling (all about $$$$$$$) JMHO

 

[TxLady2]

Yes, it was a drug charge and the trial was just a couple of days long. How anyone could compare the two is beyond me.

I was NOT comparing the two cases. I merely said what his reply was to the question of the shortest time for a verdict to come back. I don't think he was comparing the two, either, he just answered the question. How someone could read more into that sentence, I have no idea.

 

[Solange82200]

Would you feel the same way had the verdict been guilty with the same amount of deliberation time?

Nope. Because the verdict would have been right. The problem is that they are using excuses for their acquittal which they would have realized are WRONG if they had taken time to look at the evidence.

Jennifer Ford claims she doesnt believe the chloroforming because Casey left with Caylee, so where would it have been done? A simple look over the phone records and testimony would have explained it to her: Casey waited for her father to leave for work, and then returned home like she always did. She killed Caylee at home.

The foreman is claiming that Cindy made the chloroform searches. ALmost a whole day was taken proving that this was false, and even if for some reason they werent paying attention, they could have reviewed the testimony and realized that there is NO WAY Cindy made those searches.

 

[rbrnmw2]

Would you feel the same way had the verdict been guilty with the same amount of deliberation time?

Yes it's called due process, the right to a fair trial by a jury of her peers, you can bet she would have gotten a mistrial if they came out with well we had a round robin discussion and decided she was guilty because the state in their opening statement said she was a liar. When asked if they reviewed notes or evidence and they said they didn't bother every defense attorney in America would be outraged.

ETA: The thing that bothers me the most is the WAY this jury came to their decision and it's not being given any attention at all in MSM. It sets up a dangerous precedent people in America(potential jurors) will think this is the way it's suppose to be done and it's not the way to do it at all~

 

[JSV]

It is as if GEORGE was the one on trial, not Casey, judging from the jury foreman. The jury THINKS that George was lying. But it was PROVEN that Casey DID lie - and HOW! And about WHAT!!!
I don´t think this jury connected the dots, and they certainly weren´t able to put two and two together. Casey´s proven lies about WHERE HER LITTLE GIRL WAS: with her nanny, at the beach, blah, blah, blah, when she full well knew that she was DEAD, rotting in the woods, while partying like crazy, Bella Vita and all. Nope, they didn´t connect the dots at all.
I was pleased when I heard the first not guilty from the jury, because it had NOT been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that it was premeditated murder IMO.
I was OK about the second not guilty, not really proven either.
But at the third, I was seriously APPALLED!!! In my view it was proven that there was at least aggravated child abuse.
She got away with it by sticking to her lies, by playing the victim and throwing her father under the bus, she got away with it because she is a very tiny, feminine and child-like woman.
YUKKK
Personally I think she is a very dangerous individual. This jury is going to regret their verdict at a later date, I predict, because this is not Casey´s last serious crime - and perhaps not even the first. There just might be a buried little baby skeleton somewhere out there, wasn´t there some talk about her having been "bloated" earlier? I think it was Lee who mentioned it. After all, the Anthonys didn´t notice that Casey was pregnant until the SEVENTH month! Her mother a NURSE!

I remember Lee asking casey in a video jail visit ... Is this like the last time .... Has she had a baby before that she murdered and threw away like trash that no one ever knew about .Sounds like it . MOO

 

[goldenlover]

The State, took air samples from a confirmed cleaned/aired out car, and said, hey this proves she killed her child with chloroform, and the state ignored the FBI's analysis that said the levels were consistent with cleaning products, and we know the car was clean. I am glad I live in this GREAT country where all I stated above is not enough to KILL someone.

Me too!

 

[Italy]

The defense did rebutt the chloroform, with the FBI crime lab expert, the one that the state chose not to put on the stand. He said the levels were not excessively high and that what was there could very possibly be from cleaning agents and other things.

You are right - however it was testified to that the chemical is volatile and that the levels were 10x that which could be explained by other agents. Defense did NOT refute that.

Records show that an inmate where Casey was held testified that the young mother told her that she would "knock out" Caylee at night with chloroform while she went out partying.

Casey and the inmate would talk through the ventilation system.

The inmate said Casey told her, "It would help [Caylee] sleep." (WTSP.com)

Again - If I look up how to make a cherry pie there is not as a result a high level of cherry juice in my trunk.

 

[Solange82200]

The defense did rebutt the chloroform, with the FBI crime lab expert, the one that the state chose not to put on the stand. He said the levels were not excessively high and that what was there could very possibly be from cleaning agents and other things.

Yes, but Jose never explained what cleaning agents were used that caused it. If it were cleaning agents causing the chloroform, you really think he wouldnt explain what Casey used, where, for what reason? It was not from cleaning solution, especially considering the fact that it hadnt completely evaporated even months later. Also, the google searches for How to Make Chloroform further cement the fact that it was chloroform. Its unreasonable to think that these are all coincidences.