Could you sit on this jury?

[crucibelle]

I could. I don't work, husband is the bread-winner, and no kids. I don't believe I could be impartial, though.. I think she's guilty & deserves the DP.

 

[Panda's eye]

Hardship-wise I could sit on this Jury. But as I have a daughter simular to Casey, who had her 1st daughter out of wedlock, in which she struggled with it. Her Dad and I were there for her. She eventually married a great guy who not only adopted her daughter of 2 yrs old to raise as his own, but they have 2 additional daughter together. This strikes way too close to home for me to be totally objective about this case. My daughter is a living example of how differently things could have turned out, if Casey had made different choices other then the ones she chose. My daughter struggles still to this day, but with the love and support of her husband and as always her Dad and I she continues to forge out a life of some quality for herself. You can never totally hope to understand the struggling relationship between Cindy and Casey until you've lived it. Although I do have sympathy for Cindy and George concerning parenting Casey, I do not agree with how they chose to handle what Casey has done. Therefore I wouldn't be an appropriate choice to be a Juror on this case........JMO

 

[Lexington]

I could sit on this jury if not for one important fact. I concluded almost three years ago that Casey is guilty as charged. When I first heard of the unreported 31 days, I immediately thought "she did it". I have not changed my mind and can't see any defense theory that would. In good conscience, I could never sit on this jury.

 

[Lucid]

I would be unable simply because my husband is a truck driver. We have kids and animals - there is literally nobody else but me to take care of them, as he is only home on the weekends. I couldn't even rely on family (live too far away) or neighbors (don't know them well enough) to help out. I didn't grow up in this state, so I don't have any friends or anything nearby, either.

 

[rbrnmw2]

ICA is GUILTY IMO and I could not be impartial

 

[Chiquita71]

:no: No. I could not. And for the same reason the potential juror lady said other people did not want to be on the jury. They already are of the opinion that Casey is guilty and know they would not give her a fair shake.

Some have said the defense could grab on to this and use it but I think it shows that people want Casey to have a fair trial. The woman in the interview said the same about her opinion- that Casey killed "her kid." That she knew, what she knew and had formed her opinion- and that as far as Casey's trial goes there were people who "knew nothing" in the waiting area. And she said when she found that out she wanted to say to them, "we better get you in there."

Can society help it if what Casey did is obvious? Everyone is doing what they can, have been doing what they can(think Yuri and Tim... ) for the Anthony family since the beginning. IMHO, they are bulls in a china shop. All anyone has been able to do is try and minimize the damage to everything and everyone around them as they insist, insist on self destructing. And, in public.

I have been typing out the jury selection process, and hearing the interviewed woman say that people want out of it because it is Casey Anthony validates my strong feelings of the same. That is exactly what I was "getting" from each one of those people. They knew who Casey was/is and they want no part of her or what she did to Caylee. The interview lady used the words "hits too close to home" and that phrase was used by another potential juror who asked to be dismissed because he believed Casey was guilty.

For every smarm ball who has come forward to make money or gain attention there are a million people who want no part of this case. Chalk one up for the belief that most people are good and decent folk. :thumb:

I believe a jury will be selected, and it will not be difficult to find twelve jurors who can listen to the testimony and weigh the evidence. I think His Honor Judge Perry is already on record fighting for ICA's right(s) to a fair trial. In fact, during his speech it was the most emotional I have ever seen His Honor. :twocents:

 

[USARDOG]

Even though I absolutely think ICA is guilty, I could put aside my views and be impartial. However, I have several large dogs and no one to care for them, and am in a new job. With only $30/d I'd be out on the street with some very hungry dogs by the time the trial was over. I'd have to take a "hardship" pass.:truce:

 

[The Farm]

I could not because I live alone with many animals and have a full time job. I would be living in a tent by the time the trial was over.

Plus the fact that I think she is guilty as sin.

 

[KaylynnCouture]

No because, as one potential juror today stated it, "I prejudged Casey and found her guilty 3 years ago". I couldn't give her a fair trial. No way.

Aside from that...hardship wise, I probably could if my parents or inlaws came to watch my kids (since I'm a stay at home mom..my husband would still be able to work and it wouldn't impact us at all financially) but it would be hard to be away from my kids for so long. But, I'd do it if I thought I could be impartial. However, I just can't.

 

[passionflower]

No.
1. I have to much knowlege as a member here.
2. I have made up my mind 'Quilty in the 1st degree'
3. I believe in giving her the DP
4. hardship........my own health reasons

 

[comomx3]

No way I could do it. I homeschool three children and have a small business tutoring children with dyslexia.

There will be people that can sit on this jury. No doubt in my mind that we will find 20.

 

[rabidstoat]

I'm not sure. If being personally against the death penalty would strike someone, then no, I couldn't serve. But I'm an analytical person. I feel like, if there were certain rules that determined when a person legally should get the death penalty, I could give the verdict if they met those criteria. Or maybe to explain better, I could deliver a 'guilty' verdict knowing the person would get the death penalty, even though I believe we should get rid of the DP altogether.

Other than that, hrm. Work would hate me for leaving for 6-8 weeks, I'm pretty central to things, but they could manage (albeit with an impact and huge inconveniences). I get paid for jury duty. I have a cat, but maybe I could take him to the hotel, or I could surely get someone to watch him. No real pressing medical issues. No dependent children or others.

But, like most everyone else, I've been exposed to too much media about the case, even if I think I could be unbiased.

 

[ScubaTwinn]

Wow! Thank you all for your responses. I didn't phrase it well, but initially meant, could you get past the hardship phase? Thanks again to all who answered that part - there really is a lot of diverse reasons we could or could not serve. But those who mentioned posting, blogging, knowing for three years she's been guilty, religeous reason, not agreeing with the death penalty - whatever you may have replied with other than the hardship, thank you also. It's really eye opening everyone's thoughts and opinions about why they could or could not serve.

Mr Scuba was foreman on a murder trial, manslaughter, found guilty. I was called on a murder trial, 1st degree but had gone to high school with the defendant. The Judge still asked me if I could serve unbiased. I was really surprised at that. We both get called about every two years.

 

[Chiquita71]

RE: People like me who say we could not give Casey a fair shake because we are of the opinion she is guilty. The defense team has stated, some people have convicted Casey without a trial. Which really doesn't matter because "we" are nobodys as is and should be. :smile: But...

I have to add, if the evidence that was presented in court by the defense held information that showed Casey was innocent, I would be able to change my mind about her "guilt." Of course. I think that is implied for most people who feel the same as I, that she is guilty.

But, I believe that because of my own conclusions. All the "jury pool tainting" is funny to the degree that-no one can taint me. Just because information is presented to me, does not cause me to see it in the way it is being presented.

I have my own mind. :curtsey: And, most people do (have their own minds) -ask the people on all the different message boards and various comment sections, if other people can change their minds? When was the last time you were able to change someone's mind about something they believe strongly? In my experience, it is not easy to do.

I can't help if Casey's actions show clearly she is lying about what happened to Caylee. I cannot help that I am upset about what happened to Caylee and upset at her mother for not being as upset. No one can help that Casey has not come forward to defend herself.

In my worldview, people who are telling the truth do not have to lie. Her own lies make her guilty. It is not a choice or really an opinion I am making, but as we all know, these posts are :cow:

 

[Spangle]

Nope
Spouse travels, so I need to be home with the teen age kids. If I could go home every night, I could do it. If I could check in during breaks, I could do it. It's possible that we could get a friend to stay at the house, so it's possible.

And I believe the point of the question was to figure out the hardship issue.

Since I read and post here, that pretty much makes me not eligible to be on the jury. different.

 

[legalmania]

Yes, I could. I use to help prepare for trials and I also served on juries a few times. I know exactly what it is like. I would base my decision on what facts where presented and proven to me.The prosecution would have to prove it's case beyond a reasonable doubt. The only problem I would see is I'm in another state.

 

[CarmelEyesD]

I could, and I would! Do you HAVE to tell them you know she is guilty??

 

[LadyL]

I could, except for the fact I live in Canada.

 

[Peliman]

I'm afraid my tourette syndrome would keep me from serving. I'd probably be listening intently to defense testimony and all of a sudden jump up and blurt out B#!!S*!^

Nope, I'd have to scuse myself.

 

[legalmania]

I could, and I would! Do you HAVE to tell them you know she is guilty??

If they ask you directly yes.