Hi guys! I feel a bit like an interloper since I didn't follow the case and trial with y'all. At the time I followed bits and snatches only, yet I too was shocked at the verdict. I've read every single post in this thread and I can see how Caylee's case affected so many of you here. I feel for you as I have a few similar cases where I too have difficulty letting go and moving on... Lonzie Barton is one and in that case both main players actually went to jail. Still, IMO their sentences weren't enough. Delano Wilson - the father was found not guilty despite overwhelming evidence, including video, that he lied through his teeth about his newborn's disappearance.
Anyway, coming in late I'm sure some of my comments will sound naive but well, like y'all, I have to spit them out...
First off, IMO the default emotion of any parent or grandparent finding a precious child/grandchild floating in a pool is 100% not to immediately accept that oops! the child is beyond help and therefore it's best to conceal their body - like trash, undeserving of a proper burial, in some remote swamp. Seriously, what loving parent or grandparent would choose to do so? The most logical reaction is DENIAL that they are dead and cannot be revived. And certainly you call 911. Because there's always the chance that they can be brought back - we've all read those stories. It takes time to process that a loved one is truly dead.
I do think that understanding some of the forensics, such as the gas chromatography of decomp and the decomposition hair bands would have been difficult for even a more sophisticated panel than that of the jury. Sometimes groundbreaking science can seem like voodoo without enough compelling evidence derived through the scientific method. In fairness, both methods are still controversial.
Still, I feel like the jury dismissed the evidence out of hand, kind of like DNA analysis in the past. Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it has no merit. And at the same time the jury apparently accepted Dr. Spitz's ridiculous assertion that the duct tape was placed on Caylee's face in order to move her skull. Really? Why? What possible reason would there be to place duct tape over a child's nose and mouth if not prevent the child from breathing? Why would the jury choose to ignore what may have possibly been the most incriminating bit of evidence in the whole case?
Ugh, I have more but certainly not anything that all of you here who followed the case closely haven't already discussed. I guess I'm mostly angry - at the jury, at CA, at her parents... Personally I'm leaning more and more towards thinking that it may be time to consider professional jurors. I dunno.
Anyway, I just wanted to rant a bit and also to give a nod to those of you who stood by and through this awful trial for little Caylee's sake. It's one of the reasons I'm a member here.