Casey Anthony Grand Jury Indictment, a Closer Look

[Curious Me]

The duct tape could have been used to shush Caylee, but mothers who do that aren't showing concern for the child's welfare. The fact is Caylee died. I think they can prove the tape was put on before death occurred, or soon after to insure death. IMO, the heart sticker residue being gone doesn't matter, fact being, Casey put duct tape on Caylee. A precious little girl died, and there's some proof her mother wanted her dead to go have "the beautiful life".

It takes the Death Penalty to get even a speck of remorse out of these selfish killers - oh yeah, the tears are always for themselves. Caylee was precious. Casey cries that she may never have chili with the family again. Can't wait to see the doc dump that's on the way.

Casey can't be excused for lacking a heart, or the brains to pull this off. Crimes against children must have severe consequences. Yeah, she turned into a Huge Waste to society.

 

[Curious Me]

The duct tape could have been used to shush Caylee, but mothers who do that aren't showing concern for the child's welfare. Caylee died. I think they can prove the tape was put on before death occurred, or soon after to insure death. Casey can not be excused for not having a heart or a brain. I'm not sure she'll get the DP, but LWOP for sure. Yeah, she turned into a Huge Waste to society.

 

[Leila]

:clap: and BBM

I don't mean to sound offensive in any way to those who don't have a clear, strong opinion that KC murdered Caylee,... but I often wonder if it has been considered that all on its own, the 31 days and the conduct that followed it is, IMO, the colossal fact that will keep coming back to the jury. What was the reaction of the majority of us here before even hearing and reading the rest of the evidence? I'll speak for myself.....I instantly and unwaveringly concluded that she had killed her child. I think JB and Co. will try and keep as many mothers off the jury for that reason. B/c we know, no mother who had her baby abducted would keep silent for 31 seconds, let alone 31 days. You'd toss the "script" (if there was one, snort) and call 911 immediately. Ugly coping will not explain that away to the jury. Nothing can. If one was to undergo such a sudden, inexplicable turn of events such as a trusted "nanny" abducting your child and was warned to keep quiet, you would still have to deal w/ the trauma and would be an emotional and physical wreck. It would not be possible to go dancing in a dress that was meant to be a top, groping another girl, and having your photo taken at every opportunity. Could your trembling fingers even type out a text message? Would you eat? Sleep? No. The jury knows that, just as we know that. 31 Days

Sorry to wax dramatic, but I've been away for several days, and just wanted to put it out there that it all comes down to the 31 days.

I remember my own reaction well. I flipped on the television and heard the news that a 2-year-old child was missing in Florida and her mother hadn't reported her disappearance in 31 days! My first thought was - "that mother killed her 2-year-old child." I came here to WS to find there was a thread already started. So before knowing any details, not even the names of those involved, I had come to the conclusion that the child, who we now know as Caylee, was dead. As the details became known, they only reinforced my initial thoughts.

 

[Leila]

On the subject of grand juries being quick to indict, I'm reminded of the Stacy Peterson case.

For those who haven't followed that case, Stacy Peterson was the fourth wife of police officer, Drew Peterson, in Bolingbrook, Illinois. Stacy disappeared on Sunday, October 28, 2007. Later that night, Drew Peterson had his step-brother help him carry a heavy container from the upstairs master bedroom to the back of his SUV. The step-brother, who feared Drew Peterson, is convinced he helped move Stacy's body. He attempted suicide two days later.

In the wake of Stacy's disappearance the Illinois State Police decided to exhume the body of Drew Peterson's third wife, Kathleen Savio, who was found dead in a bathtub with no water in it in 2004. A second and third autopsy was done on the remains and both concluded that Kathleen's death was a homicide, not accidental as was first determined.

The death of Kathleen and the disappearance of Stacy, were put before the Will County Grand Jury in November of 2007, shortly after Stacy's disappearance. It wasn't until May of 2009, a year and a half later that the grand jury finally handed down an indictment for murder for Drew Peterson.

 

[mitzi]

On the subject of grand juries being quick to indict, I'm reminded of the Stacy Peterson case.

For those who haven't followed that case, Stacy Peterson was the fourth wife of police officer, Drew Peterson, in Bolingbrook, Illinois. Stacy disappeared on Sunday, October 28, 2007. Later that night, Drew Peterson had his step-brother help him carry a heavy container from the upstairs master bedroom to the back of his SUV. The step-brother, who feared Drew Peterson, is convinced he helped move Stacy's body. He attempted suicide two days later.

In the wake of Stacy's disappearance the Illinois State Police decided to exhume the body of Drew Peterson's third wife, Kathleen Savio, who was found dead in a bathtub with no water in it in 2004. A second and third autopsy was done on the remains and both concluded that Kathleen's death was a homicide, not accidental as was first determined.

The death of Kathleen and the disappearance of Stacy, were put before the Will County Grand Jury in November of 2007, shortly after Stacy's disappearance. It wasn't until May of 2009, a year and a half later that the grand jury finally handed down an indictment for murder for Drew Peterson.

OT-Leila, isn't the GJ still meeting for Stacy's case, too? I have a feeling that they are just waiting to see if Drew gets convicted for Kathleen's death, and if not, they will hit him with a true bill for Stacy. What are your thoughts?

 

[thedeviledadvocate]

I don't think a seasoned sa would have much of a problem getting a grand jury indictment in this case. I do find it interesting that at one point they took the dp off the table only to reinstate it later. I believe they will take the dp off the table shortly before the case goes to trial.

The 31 days of not reporting her child missing makes it very difficult for me to presume Casey is innocent until the state proves beyond a reasonable doubt that she is guilty.
But I must, its the law.

I'm afraid the media in this case has followed the path of the O.J. case. They seem to have tried and convicted Casey and want her blood. Most media releases are bent on proving her guilt. When something comes to light that doesn't fit, they spin it in the most negative way that can. At least it seems this way in my opinion.

What I am really afraid of is this: I'm afraid the media pressure and hype may have influenced and is still influencing the way the police and sa are handling this case. Maybe, just maybe the police and sa have become so focused on trying to prove Casey's guilt, that perhaps they aren't looking down any other roads or looking at any other possibilities. Maybe, just maybe they have developed tunnel vision and can't see anything unless it looks like it may prove Casey's guilt.

I am so looking forward to the trial when we get to see ALL the evidence, until then
I must presume Casey is innocent

 

[Curious Me]

LE really did their job. The trouble was the mother of this missing child gave them only lies to follow up on. The mother's car reeked of death. "Kidnapped 31 days ago", said the mother. The child's body is found with all the evidence being from the family home. It seems the circumstantial evidence alone is pointing to the mother. My bet is on the state. They will have an extremely strong case as confirmed once the body was found.

 

[Clock's Tickin]

Do they really have to prove "how" the baby died in a specific scenerio? I mean, due to the condition of the remains, isn't it a pretty obvious indication that the death was not "accidental" or "natural"? For instance the mother whose baby suffocated so she disposed of the child in the grass by the highway and claimed to have been knocked unconscious at the park and the baby was snatched. In that case no prep work was done to the deceased. I would think that KC's behavior alone would make for a pretty strong case, hence the indictment--now that they have the remains as well, I'd say it would not be a hard case to try. Am I way off?