2011.07.11 Greta Van Sustern interview with Jury Foreperson

[dekalb]

Did anyone see JG father on JVM? Was asked if he saw any similarity with CA lies on the stand and ICA. He said they both added more detail than necessary when answering. ITA. CA drove me crazy on the stand, long drawn out details that didn't add anything to the case. Even when she asked HHBP about taking down the pic of Caylee, on and on about trying not to cry. I think she loves the attention that this trial brought. Like my Granny use to say she wants to be the bride at every wedding and the corpse at every funeral

 

[JMCDAD]

You know this never could have happened if George and Cindy hadn't lied from week one to protect Casey. They spun they blamed and they lied. Then they got locked into those lies and it made them appear more guilty. Baez should be paying them for their daughter's defense not the other way around. These parents made Baez's job easy to turn the bus around and head toward George and Lee.

And the jury believed the absolute worst about George with no evidence. Not one shred of evidence. George was put in a position of fighting the appearances that Baez was trying to cast upon him.

It just goes to show. If you are going to murder someone get your friends, your enemies and your family to lie for you. And then pick which one to drive the bus over later on.

Sex, drugs and rock and roll ya know. It sells. And this jury bought the fantasy of the sexual molestation because that was a simpler concept for them to understand rather than the forensic evidence.

I agree with this,the anthonys especially Cindy (and Lee) made it difficult for the prosecution and easier for the defense
When I heard in the trial that Lee refused to meet with the prosecution at their request, but that he reached out to defense with some type of helpful hint just made me so mad.


:banghead:

 

[6stringer]

It's called Circumstantial evidence (along with the ACTUAL evidence that the jury never paid attention to). There are very few murderers out there that take video and pictures of them committing the crimes. If that were the case, we'd never need these trials to begin with.

This jury didn't stop by just saying "Oh, there just wasn't enough proof". No, they went on to say that they found George to be questionable and believed a lot of the Defense theories. So it's okay for them to ACQUIT her based on "gray areas" but not convict her?

There was NOTHING to even suggest a drowning, but there was plenty to suggest a murder (thrown in a swamp, in garbage bags, duct tape, chloroform levels in car and searches, etc).

of course I dont believe what I am about to write, but,,,

thrown in swamp...doesnt prove murder
in garbage bags....doesnt prove murder
duct tape....looks like, but doesnt prove how Caylee died
chloroform levels in car...doesnt mean Caylee was in car at same time?

personally, I had never really been convinced of how it happened until state's closing arguments. they had me pretty convinced at that point and I was thinking she would get convicted. THEN I saw the instructions, and I gulped, then I was not surprised much by the verdict.

now, it is starting to sound like they paid too much attention to George?

 

[6stringer]

Well let me have a go at it. Here goes
Um what was the question :crazy:
Oh yeah about GA's girlfriend / helper No wait, that wasn't it. Ya know I've been on the go here alot. We have to work for almost 1 straight hour and we're allowed a lousy 25 min. SPECIAL BREAK
And then we gotta come back and sit for another half hr. till we're called to lunch. Oh Hey, "Make that GOURMET too fella". Got to get back, we're alittle past our 1 1/2 hr lunch and the DESSERT LADY won't be here for another hour from what I understand. Got to get back to that sleazy $200. a night suite the State is paying for. Steak Night? I thought Sea Food, darn !!
What was the question again?

:loser:

 

[passionflower]

why did the jurors say they cried and got sick while signing MCA NOT GUILTY verdict?
Did I hear that right?
WHY? if they truely felt they were doing the WRONG thing???
Did someone threaten them?
What happened?
Something sure stinks about this whole jury and the verdict...........JMOO

 

[JMCDAD]

:banghead:

sorry Grand I messed up before meant to comment ....

I agree with this,the anthonys especially Cindy (and Lee) made it difficult for the prosecution and easier for the defense
When I heard in the trial that Lee refused to meet with the prosecution at their request, but that he reached out to defense with some type of helpful hint just made me so mad.

 

[grandmaj]

I fixed it JM

 

[matou]

So juror 11 thought Casey looked sincere and that probably saved her (read: he thought she was pretty). A teacher working on his Masters of Education in Spec. Ed. sees a crying young woman with a dead child and thinks this is real but still finds her guilty of lying to police officers on four counts. Did the police think she looked sincere? They also probably thought she was pretty and trying pretty hard to dissuade them to search for Caylee and that got them pretty angry with her right away. Why was he so sympathetic to Casey? Why did he let this go? Would he have been so sympathetic to her if she weren't as attractive in a flag? JMO

 

[suzihawk]

Yah and Cindy might not have remembered if they used the hose that morning, they could have, because she recalls that the grass was looking a little yellow and so it's quite possible that she used the hose that morning and sprayed the pavement and newspapers and everything while hosing the yard.

And Lee is upset because no one woke him up to join in the hose spraying fun.

And then Roy Kronk just may have gotten a little frisky with the hose while reading his meters that morning and he may have sprayed the hose.

And then LE came in and positioned the hose JUST SO, in order to make it look like the hose was not used.

And anyone else that lived in a 10 mile radius of the Anthony home was just lying and saying it rained that morning because they all have it out for the sweet little angel Casey.

So yah, there are lots of explanations besides the simple fact that it rained. :banghead:

Perfect!

 

[SCWldneart]

You know this never could have happened if George and Cindy hadn't lied from week one to protect Casey. They spun they blamed and they lied. Then they got locked into those lies and it made them appear more guilty. Baez should be paying them for their daughter's defense not the other way around. These parents made Baez's job easy to turn the bus around and head toward George and Lee.

And the jury believed the absolute worst about George with no evidence. Not one shred of evidence. George was put in a position of fighting the appearances that Baez was trying to cast upon him.

It just goes to show. If you are going to murder someone get your friends, your enemies and your family to lie for you. And then pick which one to drive the bus over later on.



Sex, drugs and rock and roll ya know. It sells. And this jury bought the fantasy of the sexual molestation because that was a simpler concept for them to understand rather than the forensic evidence.

EXACTLY!! They supplied JB with everything he needed, even the 'drowning' theory. Cindy never saw that ladder up to the pool or the gate open. The 'someone' who suggested that Caylee might have drowned in the pool (surprise, surprise) was Cindy! She was hoping that would be an "open" for KC if that's what really happened.

They all lied...every last one of them, from beginning to end.
They'll never know the truth because the truth and the A's are strangers...

 

[JusticeSeeker1960]

So juror 11 thought Casey looked sincere and that probably saved her (read: he thought she was pretty). A teacher working on his Masters of Education in Spec. Ed. sees a crying young woman with a dead child and thinks this is real but still finds her guilty of lying to police officers on four counts. Did the police think she looked sincere? They also probably thought she was pretty and trying pretty hard to dissuade them to search for Caylee and that got them pretty angry with her right away. Why was he so sympathetic to Casey? Why did he let this go? Would he have been so sympathetic to her if she weren't as attractive in a flag? JMO

Is this who ICA kept winking at during the trial? Remember, we kept wondering...hmmm? And, did I hear the doctor on NG say she was upset over how the public vewed her?

 

[SCWldneart]

So juror 11 thought Casey looked sincere and that probably saved her (read: he thought she was pretty). A teacher working on his Masters of Education in Spec. Ed. sees a crying young woman with a dead child and thinks this is real but still finds her guilty of lying to police officers on four counts. Did the police think she looked sincere? They also probably thought she was pretty and trying pretty hard to dissuade them to search for Caylee and that got them pretty angry with her right away. Why was he so sympathetic to Casey? Why did he let this go? Would he have been so sympathetic to her if she weren't as attractive in a flag? JMO

This is what I'm having the most difficulty with comprehending. They were told that, because this was a circumstantial evidence case, their decision would rely heavily on the credibility of the witnesses, yet they chose to believe only the witnesses who LIED UNDER OATH and as well as the defendant whom they, themselves, found guilty of lying! This is just so messed up.

 

[Prof]

I don't think that Juror #11 ever made the statement that he thought ICA was "sincere." I know he did not make that statement last night here http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-th...evidence-and-suspicions-george-anthony?page=3

I think he was misquoted. Greta was giving a segue into her interview with CM who described ICA in glowing terms, but the "sincere" word was not used by CM or the juror.
I think that is important to clear up, as the jurors never heard ICA except in the evidence.

 

[suzihawk]

I really do think a lot of this kind of talk is quite unfair (and completely unfounded), but obviously people are entitled to express their opinions.

I do wonder how much this is going to affect high profile capital cases in the future. I think there are enough issues with people finding excuses not to sit on juries, but it will be worse now.

I agree. It's a shame that these jurors not only let a child killer go free. But they also managed to make the entire judicial system look like a big joke. They demonstrated that even high profile capital cases don't merit the investment of time or deliberation. No need to bother following the jury instructions. Just listen to opening and closing statements to see who has the most passion or the best acting ability. Or see who smiles the most when greeting the jury. Don't get bogged down with pesky details or evidence.

Yup, I agree. This jury will change the face of all future jurys. That's a damn shame. My opinion, of course.

 

[SyraKelly]

We inhabit a decadent, ethical-relativist, shameless, sensation-seeking,
instant gratification-seeking, cynical/jaundiced, me-me-me-me culture. Horrible!!
Not the America I grew up in.

That being said, there should be a Law(s) to preclude/prohibit ANY Juror
from making one thin DIME off their service on ANY Jury for ANY Case.
Yes, "there should be a Law(s)," I hear myself saying...despite my
loathing of this nanny-state, deny-reality, sense-of-entitlement (read vengeance, aka "social justice")
Big Brother government.

TWO LAWS are needed...1) Caylee's Law, already well-underway...
...and 2) Let's call it "Greta's Law" (!!!) for now...precluding/preventing/prohibiting ANY Juror...
(as in 2nd paragraph above).

As for Greta, she's the coldest fish in the notoriously glib, vacuous,
venal, vapid Tele-Sphere-O-Vision universe that has been part-and-parcel
of bringing us all to our trembling KNEES.

And she's STILL talking out of the side of her mouth!

How in the World did Greta ever become "Greta," anyway? Anybody know?
I mean, how do AT LEAST ONE-HALF of these people GET there?
Sunny Hostin...Geraldo...Greta...Jane Velez-Mitchell...HUH?? WHY??

Where do they GET these people? Why do we DESERVE them?
They're such a blathering, blithering blight.

Somebody shut them all UP!

With that, everybody enjoy this overly-heated Summer Day that is so fitting
of our over-heated sentiments these days.

UMM-You out left out the biggie-NG-just kidding with ya..I agree with you 100%!

 

[SCWldneart]

Yah and Cindy might not have remembered if they used the hose that morning, they could have, because she recalls that the grass was looking a little yellow and so it's quite possible that she used the hose that morning and sprayed the pavement and newspapers and everything while hosing the yard.

And Lee is upset because no one woke him up to join in the hose spraying fun.

And then Roy Kronk just may have gotten a little frisky with the hose while reading his meters that morning and he may have sprayed the hose.

And then LE came in and positioned the hose JUST SO, in order to make it look like the hose was not used.






And anyone else that lived in a 10 mile radius of the Anthony home was just lying and saying it rained that morning because they all have it out for the sweet little angel Casey.

So yah, there are lots of explanations besides the simple fact that it rained. :banghead:

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh: Thanks for the laugh. I really needed that!

 

[SCWldneart]

I don't think that Juror #11 ever made the statement that he thought ICA was "sincere." I know he did not make that statement last night here http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-th...evidence-and-suspicions-george-anthony?page=3

I think he was misquoted. Greta was giving a segway into her interview with CM who described ICA in glowing terms, but the "sincere" word was not used by CM or the juror.
I think that is important to clear up, as the jurors never heard ICA except in the evidence.

So where did he get the idea that KC was "likable, intelligent and articulate"? Whether or not he said the actual word makes no difference to me. It all means the same thing.

 

[gladiatorqueen]

I agree. It's a shame that these jurors not only let a child killer go free. But they also managed to make the entire judicial system look like a big joke. They demonstrated that even high profile capital cases don't merit the investment of time or deliberation. No need to bother following the jury instructions. Just listen to opening and closing statements to see who has the most passion or the best acting ability. Or see who smiles the most when greeting the jury. Don't get bogged down with pesky details or evidence.

Yup, I agree. This jury will change the face of all future jurys. That's a damn shame. My opinion, of course.

People's recent accusations about the jury are unfounded. Until there is actual proof that their votes were bought by the DT, that they are subpar in intelligence, didn't follow instructions, only listened to opening and closing statements, and made their decision on who smiled at them the most rather than weighing all the evidence before them, then I don't believe such opinions have a leg to stand on--although, of course, everyone is free to express them.

 

[Dr.Fessel]

Why, why, why am I watching this guy again?

 

[Peachy Keen]

Juror #11 says they were asked to convict on a cause of death??? WTH???