A few years ago Greta would have had good questions instead of letting him control everything. Maybe he just has a way of taking control. He said he had someone helping him out and said "she" so it was a woman. I would bet that it was juror #3. He didn't really say in what way she was helping but it wouldn't surprise me if it was bullying the other jurors who didn't agree. Why didn't they use paper to put their vote on? That seems less intimidating to me. I have no doubt that this guy is the reason for the verdict. He is a know-it-all and is very persuasive. He can read people by his own words, and he knew just how to get at them to persuade them. The more I hear of these jurors, the sicker I get. They let this man tell them what they were supposed to do and he didn't have a clue.
The verdict was Tuesday, July 5th. She got her free trip to Disney the day of the verdict.K! lol What was the verdict date? :waitasec:
I am a little skeptical at these 400 pages of notes. I remember all kinds of tweets saying that not many notes were taken by anyone, except Ms Shall Not Judge, who only took notes when the defense presented.
No, their job was to prove premeditated murder beyond a reasonable doubt. They didn't do that, IMO. The jury can't just "give" a guilty verdict because they want to find justice for Caylee. It doesn't work that way.
The rule of felony murder is a legal doctrine in some common law jurisdictions that broadens the crime of murder in two ways. First, when an offender kills accidentally or without specific intent to kill in the course of an applicable felony, what might have been manslaughter is escalated to murder. Second, it makes any participant in such a felony criminally liable for any deaths that occur during or in furtherance of that felony. While there is some debate about the original scope of the rule, modern interpretations typically require that the felony be an inherently dangerous one, or one committed in an obviously dangerous manner. For this reason, the felony murder rule is often justified by its supporters as a means of deterring dangerous felonies.
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.
For some reason I think it was # 7. She was the only one crying as the vertict was read.
The verdict was Tuesday, July 5th. She got her free trip to Disney the day of the verdict.
So he is lying? I see.
These accusations about the jury are CIRCUMSTANTIAL and I'm sticking by them!:justice:
They did NOT have to prove premeditation to get a 1st degree murder count. They could have found there was sufficient evidence of felony murder to convict. Aggravated child abuse is a felony, and the duct tape and traces of chloroform were evidence of that.
#3 also said she didn't vote guilty of any charges other than lying because KC would get the DP.
I truly,honestly think this was part of the problem. JA was a frickin' GENIUS up there....he knew everything about the forensics, it was absolutely amazing to watch. JB was a total goof and unprofessional. The problem when you pick a jury comprised of 'regular' people of average to low education level or intelligence, is that they tend to get intimidated by those they view as 'superior'. JA and LDB simply were in a class of their own. I think people on here at certain points during the trial pointed out that JA's intelligence might be too much for some people. After hearing these jurors speak, and this is not meant to be an insult, but honestly, they are not that smart. They simply related to JB and his dramatic theories (everyone loves a good soap opera story). Sadly, it's what has become of humanity. We love a good CSI or Law and Order episode with fake dramatics and over-the-top storylines. They simply related to child abuse, drowning, controlling parents more than the likes of genius minds like Vass, Haskell, Bloise, etc... IMO
#3 also said she didn't vote guilty of any charges other than lying because KC would get the DP.
Well, since they had her on tape lying I guess that was enough proof for them. Too bad there wasn't a tape of her killing her child. Maybe, just maybe, they would have believed that, too.
I've given up posting this, I appreciate your tenacity. Maybe after it's posted a couple hundred more times even the jury will be able to understand it.
Maybe not.