2011.07.11 Greta Van Sustern interview with Jury Foreperson

[sappysoul]

I realize that, but they claimed premeditated murder, and carry the burden of proof. They can't just make a claim and hope everyone believes them! And yes, I clearly understand that they can still give 1st degree murder without premeditation, but they couldn't prove murder. I'm tired of posting this actually, and will likely stop posting on the section of the website altogether pretty soon.

If you believe the duct tape and traces of chloroform, sure, but I don't, and it's sounds like the jury didn't either. There was too much conflicting evidence and holes in their theories. MOO

bbm

Really? What are all the conflicting evidence and holes? I can't think of one reasonable explanation for the duct tape being on her face that isn't related to either aggravated child abuse or murder. Help me out.

 

[MissJames]

I do not like this guy at all he has and had an agenda, he IMO is a definite stealth juror. I wonder since he seemed to dislike Ashton so much if by chance this is payback for something Ashton unknowingly did to him.

What a bunch of flowers these others must have been to just roll over so quickly and deliver such an obscene verdict.

The more this guy talks the worse it gets and quite frankly I won't be surprised if someone tries to hurt him.

This is what I don't understand .How did they all fall in line so fast!
I really believe at least one of the jurors had the others convinced he/she knew the "rules" and he/she would challenge the ones who wanted to vote guilty.

 

[krt]

And if I remember correctly, she said something about 'how hard it was' to see the pool and not be able to go out there. FGS. How torturous that must have been. How did she ever get through it?

Considering how allegedly poor Caylee "accidently drowned in the pool" NOT....it is even more evident (BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT) as to the lack of cognition.

ALSO, I haven't heard any of us "bloggers" <---tongue-in-cheek mention that ANY of the jurors that have not shut their pie hole yet even MENTION Caylee by name or how bad he/she feels re this poor innocent beautiful girl's life was taken!

AND for the record, THE number 3 used to be my favorite number! NOT ANYMORE!!!

 

[sappysoul]

This is what I don't understand .How did they all fall in line so fast!
I really believe at least one of the jurors had the others convinced he/she knew the "rules" and he/she would challenge the ones who wanted to vote guilty.

I guess ignorance is no excuse unless you are a juror on a capital murder case. God help us.

 

[nssherlock]

This reminds me of a Chappelle skit entitled Law and Order....everytime someone mentions the jury would need a video of the crime to convict I think of this skit!

Warning, vulgar and profanity.....in my eyes HILARIOUS!!! Start at 5:48......it is worth watching!!!

http://youtu.be/-XoMVtqYdsA

Hilarious!......and I think this was viewed by the jury instead of the evidence.

 

[everyoneneedsavoice]

The jury foreman was incensed by JA's "smirk" during JB's closing and his "pig in a blanket" reference!!! GOOD GRIEF---hope 'bout getting incensed about something IMPORTANT---like decomp in the car, death banded hair, 31 days, duct tape, etc. etc. etc!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But mesmerized by JBs "Who cut the cheese" reference to the smell of decomp in the trunk of the car???
ETA...and JBs professionalism in handling JAs "smirk"; along with his (JB) antics of attempting to introduce witnesses and evidence NOT ALLOWED throughout the trial; didn't incense him? Righttttt!!!!

Makes about as much sense as them believing ICA was sincere while convicting her of lying to LE about the "disappearance" of her child; whom they can't determine who the caretaker was at the time of the drowning for which there was no evidence to support ever happened; but was easier "to get to" than the factual data presented during this same trial we all watched in which 2 cadaver dogs, multiple experts and even laypersons smelled human decomp in the trunk of the vehicle that, by the DTs own admission, was the vehicle ICA was driving at the time!

Now...I smell something stinky and I can't figure out if it's the smell of the "cheese" they thought they would make; or something more sinister? IMO, there is alot more to this verdict and I can only pray that someone let's the cat out the bag, because I will NEVER be convinced that the "stories" being told now by these jurors aren't just that...stories!

Oh... And thanks for the notes...I refused to watch but in the spirit of a true WS addict...I come here for the details, absent the spin!

 

[gladiatorqueen]

bbm

Really? What are all the conflicting evidence and holes? I can't think of one reasonable explanation for the duct tape being on her face that isn't related to either aggravated child abuse or murder. Help me out.

You know what? No. It's been written a zillion times on numerous threads throughout this forum and I'm tired of that question having to be answered again and again and again and again.

I think I am going to just go back to lurking for a bit as I'm getting fairly frustrated at the dog chasing its tail thingy that seems to be going on. I mean no offense but need to give myself a TO. Cheers.

 

[Solange82200]

I realize that, but they claimed premeditated murder, and carry the burden of proof. They can't just make a claim and hope everyone believes them! And yes, I clearly understand that they can still give 1st degree murder without premeditation, but they couldn't prove murder. I'm tired of posting this actually, and will likely stop posting on the section of the website altogether pretty soon.

If you believe the duct tape and traces of chloroform, sure, but I don't, and it's sounds like the jury didn't either. There was too much conflicting evidence and holes in their theories. MOO

It seems like both sides are going around in circles, I know you are tired of repeating stuff and so am I. I guess both sides just see things so differently it isn;t something that can come to any conclusion, since we will never agree. I share your frustration, I know you take it personally when people insult the jurors. I kind of know how you feel, I feel the same way when I hear baseless accusations against George, the forensic experts, the prosecutors. Even if you dont agree, can you see how we feel the same way when we hear negative things about those people?

I just want to say, in my opinion, they didnt make a claim and just hope people believed it. They called qualified experts who testified about the chloroform, duct tape, etc. For some reason you choose to not believe the experts, and you're entitled to that. But I think it isnt fair to say that they just made a claim for no reason. I dont want you to stop posting in this thread, but I dont blame you if you dont, Im kind of to a point where I just cant say more than what Ive said, or come to a point where I can change anyone;s mind that doesnt agree. No hard feelings, ok? You are a cool person from what Ive seen so far, youve done a good job holding your own without making it personal.

 

[Steve4Justice]

This guy still has no clue how badly he was played.

Maybe one or more kids in his class will point it out to him.

 

[legalmania]

OK, well the jury found in Caseys a favorable decision, they are a intelligent group of people who have to deal with a bunch of wackos for now on, so now what the best thing to do is wait for the civil trials. First of all The Honorable Judge Perry is going to fine her to the max. Then she has to pay IRS for the $200k she got from some pictures, she sold. Her finances will be looked over with by a fine tooth comb.

 

[rotterdam]

Why is everyone assuming these not so sharp people are going to get big book deals? They were only "behind the scenes" during deliberations and who the heck would pay to read anymore about that? Save yourself some money and just repeatedly bang your head against the wall. They didn't even see as much as we did and obviously didn't understand at least half of what they did see. A book by any of these jurors would be completely worthless.

I assume you are being kind and considerate to the jury. "Didn't understand at least half", Really???. Me think , it was a lot less than that.

 

[tiffertots]

Why is everyone assuming these not so sharp people are going to get big book deals? They were only "behind the scenes" during deliberations and who the heck would pay to read anymore about that? Save yourself some money and just repeatedly bang your head against the wall. They didn't even see as much as we did and obviously didn't understand at least half of what they did see. A book by any of these jurors would be completely worthless.

A waste..a HUGE waste!!

 

[krt]

The verdict was Tuesday, July 5th. She got her free trip to Disney the day of the verdict.

If she knows how to use a phone, I wouldn't put it past her to get on the horn as soon as she got back to the hotel and call the news agencies herself, she comes across that brazen to me IMO.

 

[magic-cat]

So he is lying? I see.

Maybe...

 

[simplesimon]

Why is everyone assuming these not so sharp people are going to get big book deals? They were only "behind the scenes" during deliberations and who the heck would pay to read anymore about that? Save yourself some money and just repeatedly bang your head against the wall. They didn't even see as much as we did and obviously didn't understand at least half of what they did see. A book by any of these jurors would be completely worthless.

a book by them would be a waste...a HUGE waste:maddening:

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

The jury foreman was incensed by JA's "smirk" during JB's closing and his "pig in a blanket" reference!!! GOOD GRIEF---hope 'bout getting incensed about something IMPORTANT---like decomp in the car, death banded hair, 31 days, duct tape, etc. etc. etc!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Snipped from the Jury Instructions:

"4. Remember, the lawyers are not on trial. Your feelings about them should not influence your decision in this case."

http://insession.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/04/jury-instructions-in-the-casey-anthony-trial/

 

[MissJames]

If he really wanted an honest first vote he would have done an anonymous ballot. I bet there would have been a different count to start with. Maybe 4 or 5 for guilt. I mean, imagine if the first six shot their hands up for not guilty,
would that make a few others pause?

The way #2 described it is ,the first vote was for Felony 1 ,not NG.
Then it was 6-6 on the manslaughter .
There was some heavy duty "convincing" going on in that room,IMO.
Now I want to hear from the other jurors. I want to see if anyone has the guts to tell the real story,because their is one.

 

[Nietzsche1988]

the foreman claimed to have special expertise in scrutinizing evidence related to law cases---maybe he taught a class of some sort---and I think the others were intimidated and inclined to go along. Perry should have emboldened the other jury members by suggesting that they go through at least a few of the points on which they were going to base their decisions, e.g., any alleged conflicting/weak points, the alleged grounds for or against reasonable doubt, conscientiously studying the relevant testimony on those points at least. This was groupthink, and I wouldn't be surprised if Baez and even Casey found ways to impact the foreman during jury selection and over the weeks of trial.

 

[tiffertots]

@Krt

classic comment during final prosecution closing statements

Jose: "Objection your honor, may we approach the bench"
Perry: "No!"

 

[Nefriahaia]

The way #2 described it is ,the first vote was for Felony 1 ,not NG.
Then it was 6-6 on the manslaughter .
There was some heavy duty "convincing" going on in that room,IMO.
Now I want to hear from the other jurors. I want to see if anyone has the guts to tell the real story,because their is one.

Yeah, what are they afraid of? :waitasec: