2011.07.11 Greta Van Sustern interview with Jury Foreperson

[katydid23]

Go ahead and take his interview out of context--at this point things have gone so overboard now that I think I just have to shake my head and keep my comments to myself. Like I said. Justify calling the jurors murders all you like.

Cheers follks. Peace and out.

I did not take his words out of context. That is what he said. He said there was a good possibility that George was involved, from the cover up to possibly KILLING CAYLEE. I took nothing out of context.

And I never said the jurors were murderers. EVER. So I don't know where you got that.

And YES, people did ask to hear how the jury made their decision. I had no problem with the jury when the verdict was first announced. I figured they read the jury instructions, followed them, and made a reasoned decision.

Then they started talking and it became obvious that they did not follow the jury instructions and they did not make a reasoned decision. Ending with the foreman announcing his personal conclusion that George was likely the guilty party. And Casey seemed 'sincere.'

You can defend them all you want. That is what this board is for. But I can express my anger towards their inconsistent and ridiculous conclusions all I want as well. Juror number 3 took her family to Disney World THE DAY OF THE VERDICT. FGS. So she deserves to withstand some criticism, imo.

 

[Schu7]

People were demanding for the jury to speak and say what they were thinking and how they came to their decision......just sayin.

It sure would be better if the jurors had to explain themselves. IN ALL COURT CASES! It should be a part of juror duty. A form to be filled out explaining why you, a juror voted in such a way. I would never think they should have to explain their actions in a public appearance, but part of the court record.

They represent our society on juror duty. They work as "peers" for us. One would think we have a right to hear why we thought and acted as we did. The jurors are us after all. It goes to show how wrong the idea of an open court is in reality here.

 

[whiterum]

SOmething is really fishy and I dont like how they are all using the same catch phrases and sounding exactly like the dt. Somethings not right and the juror furor seems justified to me.

Exactly, they are like ventriloquists dummies sitting on JB's knee mimicking his very words. Makes you wonder if they actually listened to anything the prosecution had to say. Seems JB's hearsay and innuendo was interpreted as fact. Unbelievable!

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

I did not take his words out of context. That is what he said. He said there was a good possibility that George was involved, from the cover up to possibly KILLING CAYLEE. I took nothing out of context.

And I never said the jurors were murderers. EVER. So I don't know where you got that.

And YES, people did ask to hear how the jury made their decision. I had no problem with the jury when the verdict was first announced. I figured they read the jury instructions, followed them, and made a reasoned decision.

Then they started talking and it became obvious that they did not follow the jury instructions and they did not make a reasoned decision. Ending with the foreman announcing his personal conclusion that George was likely the guilty party. And Casey seemed 'sincere.'

You can defend them all you want. That is what this board is for. But I can express my anger towards their inconsistent and ridiculous conclusions all I want as well. Juror number 3 took her family to Disney World THE DAY OF THE VERDICT. FGS. So she deserves to withstand some criticism, imo.

Thank you. You got it right, katydid. Here it is (in context):

"You know, when it came to -- and this may be snowballing into a whole 'nother question that you may have for me but you know, with George, with the can, the selective memory, the way that he handled the tow yard incident, the -- you know, River Cruz, the lady that he could have had an extramarital affair with -- it raised questions. It really did.
VAN SUSTEREN: Raised questions about his character, or whether he had some involvement in the death of his granddaughter?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Really both for me, character as far as the fact that he could be possibly lying. Also, the fact that his involvement was going to be in question because he was there on the 15th. He was the -- you know, he can tell you exactly when Casey and Caylee left. How do we know that that is -- that that is right? So it questioned a lot for us. It really questioned a lot.
VAN SUSTEREN: To the point where he would let his daughter face the possibility of execution?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. I really can't answer that question, but it was -- you know, it was something that we felt, you know, we need to take a close look at with George.
VAN SUSTEREN: Did anybody think George was a believable, out of the 12 you? Anyone thing George was believable or credible, or were otherwise likewise suspicious of him?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There was a suspicion of him. That as -- that was a part of our conversation that we had of the -- well, what I'd call the round robin topics that we had when we were doing deliberation. That was brought up.
VAN SUSTEREN: Suspicious that he was involved in covering up the death, suspicious involved with the -- an accidental death, or suspicious he was a murder?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All three.
VAN SUSTEREN: Really, that he was a murderer?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All three. We don't know. We don't know. The suspicions were raised.
VAN SUSTEREN: In the deliberation room?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We talked about it in deliberation. Yes, I can go a little more in depth into what we did in the deliberation room since I was the one who had to orchestrate the whole situation.
(END VIDEOTAPE)

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-th...e-and-suspicions-george-anthony#ixzz1S1gvJWnn

 

[JusticeSeeker1960]

I did not take his words out of context. That is what he said. He said there was a good possibility that George was involved, from the cover up to possibly KILLING CAYLEE. I took nothing out of context.

And I never said the jurors were murderers. EVER. So I don't know where you got that.

And YES, people did ask to hear how the jury made their decision. I had no problem with the jury when the verdict was first announced. I figured they read the jury instructions, followed them, and made a reasoned decision.

Then they started talking and it became obvious that they did not follow the jury instructions and they did not make a reasoned decision. Ending with the foreman announcing his personal conclusion that George was likely the guilty party. And Casey seemed 'sincere.'

You can defend them all you want. That is what this board is for. But I can express my anger towards their inconsistent and ridiculous conclusions all I want as well. Juror number 3 took her family to Disney World THE DAY OF THE VERDICT. FGS. So she deserves to withstand some criticism, imo.

You know I was on the Orange County Clerk website yesterday & something really bothered me. They had a special section on the Casey Anthony case...with every motion filed, every response filed, everything in detail...you could look at everything for the past 3 years. Except, the jury instructions.....I clicked on that & it said, 'not found'....why? sunshine law, florida, everything open & out there for the world to see...it apparently was there at one time, why take it off and why now? As far as I could see that was the ONLY thing that was missing!

 

[JusticeSeeker1960]

We talked about it in deliberation. Yes, I can go a little more in depth into what we did in the deliberation room since I was the one who had to orchestrate the whole situation

quite full of himself, isn't he?

 

[Nova24]

-------key point: "[COLOR=red]...talk now when you can make money later. Barf.

 

[Nova24]

We talked about it in deliberation. Yes, I can go a little more in depth into what we did in the deliberation room since I was the one who had to orchestrate the whole situation

quite full of himself, isn't he?

Very controlling. Even tried to control the IV and Greta.

 

[katydid23]

"You know, when it came to -- and this may be snowballing into a whole 'nother question that you may have for me but you know, with George, with the can, the selective memory, the way that he handled the tow yard incident, the -- you know, River Cruz, the lady that he could have had an extramarital affair with -- it raised questions. It really did.
VAN SUSTEREN: Raised questions about his character, or whether he had some involvement in the death of his granddaughter?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Really both for me, character as far as the fact that he could be possibly lying. Also, the fact that his involvement was going to be in question because he was there on the 15th.

THe 15th? Why did he keep saying the 15th? And I love how he co-opted the word snowballing from the DT.

He was the -- you know, he can tell you exactly when Casey and Caylee left. How do we know that that is -- that that is right? So it questioned a lot for us. It really questioned a lot.

OK, so they did not necessarily believe George that she left with the child. [and what does ' questioned a lot for us' even mean? ]
So they are saying the child died and never left? OR George or SODDI took her?
Did they even realize that George showed up at work that afternoon ?


VAN SUSTEREN: To the point where he would let his daughter face the possibility of execution?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes. I really can't answer that question, but it was -- you know, it was something that we felt, you know, we need to take a close look at with George.


WAIT. He can't answer that question? That is odd because the conclusions they came to make the answer to that question YES. That is exactly what they are saying by giving her a not guilty verdict and publicly accusing him of active involvement in the crime, even considering murder.
THEY ANSWERED THAT QUESTION WITH THEIR VERDICT.
They are saying that George wanted Casey to face the DP even though he was the guilty party. So it is disingenuous for him to backtrack here.

VAN SUSTEREN: Did anybody think George was a believable, out of the 12 you? Anyone thing George was believable or credible, or were otherwise likewise suspicious of him?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: There was a suspicion of him. That as -- that was a part of our conversation that we had of the -- well, what I'd call the round robin topics that we had when we were doing deliberation. That was brought up.
VAN SUSTEREN: Suspicious that he was involved in covering up the death, suspicious involved with the -- an accidental death, or suspicious he was a murder?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All three.
VAN SUSTEREN: Really, that he was a murderer?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: All three. We don't know. We don't know. The suspicions were raised.
VAN SUSTEREN: In the deliberation room?
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We talked about it in deliberation. Yes, I can go a little more in depth into what we did in the deliberation room since I was the one who had to orchestrate the whole situation.
(END VIDEOTAPE)

Well, at least he admits that he ORCHESTRATED the 'whole situation.'

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-the...#ixzz1S1gvJWnn

 

[krt]

Baez in opening statement: "Caylee Anthony died on June 16, 2008 when she died in her family's swimming pool"
Baez in closing statement: "We will never know how Caylee died"

It absolutely boggles my mind how the jury was able to give even a shred of credibility to the defense after such a blatant contradiction, but was able to say undoubtedly George was not credible and was likely involved.. maybe even the murderer. I will never get my head around that. Nor how they were able to convict on lying without a second thought, but buy into the lies on all other charges. If she were not guilty of counts 1-3, then why are the lies (counts 4-7) even needed?? Makes no sense whatsoever..

Seems as though Linda Drane Burdick's worst fear as stated in her closing statement was in fact realized in the end.. All of the rhetoric and lies clouded BASIC COMMON SENSE

BBM

Not directed at Thinker Belle but in general......Doesn't one have to HAVE common sense prior to having it clouded? :waitasec: All of the jurors so far that have opened their pie holes have proven he/she couldn't internalize basic rules....NOT to consider opening arguments....the definition of REASONABLE DOUBT........how could ANY of us truely believe they had common sense in the first place? :crazy: :maddening: :sick: :banghead:

 

[3doglady]

Also, as some nurses on the board about the nursing student the very first thing you're taught is observation skills and cannot blame them some of their concerns if she finishes school and is hired by some hospital.

I can hear it now: LOL

Umm well the doctor, like, ordered this insulin for you, but I'm not going to give it to you because I don't know, like, the COD (cause of disease)
Well I can't just follow the doctor's instructions because it will cause the DP (death prognosis)
If the doctor had ordered something less then I could do it.
Well I didn't see the doctor write the order so what evidence is there that you need insulin?
I don't care if the other nurse saw the doctor write it, that's just circumstantial.
I can't make out "logically" the doctor's orders because there's just too many unanswered questions about how you got sick.
If I'm going to give you this insulin I have to know, where, when, why and how.
You are just as sick as your secrets. I think your father is dishonest.
You are not going into a diabetic coma, that's just bad behavior and I can't base my decision on that.
What do you mean someone might die if I don't do it?
Like, I don't have time to talk any longer.
This is just making me sick to my stomach so I'm going to Disney
I'm just too emotional to talk. Well if ABC is going to pay I can talk today.

 

[Boytwnmom]

this is a story that, if fictional, would be labelled as too ridiculous to bother reading.

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-th...an-reveals-what-happened-inside-delibe?page=2

VAN SUSTEREN: Why, after the verdict, you -- didn't the jury give a press conference? Which you are not obliged to give, by any means. I don't mean to suggest it.


Juror #11: There was sobbing. There was tears. There was just a lot of people that really didn't want to talk. That's what we did - - you know, we talked to each other hour upon hour. We wanted to unwind. We didn't want to have to answer questions. We needed time. It was a situation where we really needed time.

And with me being the foreman, I told them, you know, this is something that we just really need to give us some time and look us up later because we can't do this now.

And we -- we -- all of us came to an agreement on that. But you know, for us and our best interests and for you guys to get the best story that you needed, we needed just some time for us to unwind and gather our thoughts.


-------key point: "for us and our best interests".

 

[3doglady]

JVM talking about foreman's interview.

 

[kidz110]

u know.......I said i was gonna stay away but i was talking to my hubby about all of this, and he didnt really follow it. I mentioned to him the lady that retired early and left florida, and do u know what he said to me. Wow, she took her money and ran didnt she. This coming from a person who didnt really follow the case but has now seen the aftermath and listened to some of the juror explanations. SOmething is really fishy and I dont like how they are all using the same catch phrases and sounding exactly like the dt. Somethings not right and the juror furor seems justified to me.

BBM I said something similar on another thread- [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6880644&postcount=336"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Theory: could this have been a defense plan?[/ame]
Something is definitely not right. Anybody remember this guy from jury selection? http://www.baynews9.com/article/news/2011/june/271337/ He was handing out pamplets about jury nulification. I found this page explaining it- http://nowscape.com/fija/_conjur.htm Sometimes I wonder if some of these jurors didn't have a hidden agenda against the death penalty.

 

[3doglady]

Harvey Levin on HLN saying all networks say they don't pay but they do. They pay for pictures or through entertainment division. Hard to find out how they pay unless there is a leak inside the network.

 

[fifteen89]

Well maybe judges should sit in on deliberations from here on in!!!!
Now I heard that they think George murdered Caylee??!! WTF did that come from?? Did they just pull s**t out of their as**s????? Made s**t up just to set her free?? I am so stunned by all of this!

Yeesh. Do I speak English??? "make sure they're follow the jurying instructions". LMAO!

It sure seems to me that they chose to ignore evididence that were presented in favor of any and all other possibilities.....even though absolutely no evidence was given to support any of it. Talk about rank speculation. Yeah, maybe George did it. Maybe George put Caylee is the trunk of Casey's car.

 

[Murphismo]

hopefully I won't get trouble for this, but I am sticking to my guns to not watch any channel that features anyone from the A family to the DT, or the Jury, Joy Behar has one of the DT on tonight. I know it's just one viewer, but if everyone follows up on their anger we may make a point that no station/show should get paid blood money for the murder of any human being.

 

[lauriej]

BBM I said something similar on another thread- Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Theory: could this have been a defense plan?
Something is definitely not right. Anybody remember this guy from jury selection? http://www.baynews9.com/article/news/2011/june/271337/ He was handing out pamplets about jury nulification. I found this page explaining it- http://nowscape.com/fija/_conjur.htm


Sometimes I wonder if some of these jurors didn't have a hidden agenda against the death penalty.

BBM

..yep----but, why the hidden agenda against even "child abuse" ?????

..there was no DP on the table for that (OBVIOUS) guilty charge..

..unbelievable--------kc gets thrown in jail for lying------the defense uses a pack of lies AS her defense--------and she's found guilty of ONE thing-----------being a liar!

 

[fifteen89]

hopefully I won't get trouble for this, but I am sticking to my guns to not watch any channel that features anyone from the A family to the DT, or the Jury, Joy Behar has one of the DT on tonight. I know it's just one viewer, but if everyone follows up on their anger we may make a point that no station/show should get paid blood money for the murder of any human being.

Who's gonna be on her show? JB, CM or DS?

 

[QueenD]

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-th...an-reveals-what-happened-inside-delibe?page=2

VAN SUSTEREN: Why, after the verdict, you -- didn't the jury give a press conference? Which you are not obliged to give, by any means. I don't mean to suggest it.


Juror #11: There was sobbing. There was tears. There was just a lot of people that really didn't want to talk. That's what we did - - you know, we talked to each other hour upon hour. We wanted to unwind. We didn't want to have to answer questions. We needed time. It was a situation where we really needed time.

And with me being the foreman, I told them, you know, this is something that we just really need to give us some time and look us up later because we can't do this now.

And we -- we -- all of us came to an agreement on that. But you know, for us and our best interests and for you guys to get the best story that you needed, we needed just some time for us to unwind and gather our thoughts.


-------key point: "for us and our best interests".

BBR by me
When is he saying they talked hour upon hour? Weren't they supposed to be doing deliberations?
The more I hear these jurors speak, the sicker I get.

Juror #3 today did I hear her say say something to the fact, we were sequestered for days with no freedom? WTH, they were told this case would be like that. They are making me so mad.