Controversialist
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2011
- Messages
- 170
- Reaction score
- -38
The person who complained of the bad odor in the car to her current BFF - also blamed the odor on dead squirrels that originated from her father using the car!!
As a juror, I would have forced this jury into one of two options:
[1]--- Declare ICA guilty of Charge Three (if the pool accident was true). Or,
[2]--- Declare ICA guilty of Charge One or Two (if the pool accident was false).
[1]--- If the pool accident was true, ICA was guilty of Charge Three for her response to it (no call to 911 to possibly save Caylee). Not to mention ICA's possible negligence resulting in Caylee being alone in the pool death trap.
[2]--- If the pool accident was false, ICA was obviously covering up her own felony act toward Caylee. ICA would have no reason to tell a false accident story at trial, just to cover up a true accident.
IMO the jury had no logical way out of these two above options. No logic makes ICA innocent of all three Charges.
To the jury I would say, "On the pool accident claim, don't just 'punt the ball' or 'kick the can down the road.' Either the pool theory is true or false. Make up your mind, then rule accordingly. :dj: :dj: :dj: