Did Jurors Talk About Case during Trial Against Judge's Orders?

[tehcloser]

You have to wonder if some sort of tampering was going on. I know for a fact that one of the jurors (female) felt she was guilty.

How do you know this "fact"?

 

[Gma Kat]

It appears the jury follows the rules about as well as the defense team...............is it any wonder?

 

[miabellamoure]

I am not sure what the jury wearing suits has to do with it, since none of them met with the press anyway...and no one saw them, outisde of those in the courtroom...

:waitasec:...maybe they were actually wearing their party clothes thinking they'd be invited to the DT bird flipping celebration afterwards...

 

[heartfortruth]

When the trial was going on, I reassured myself that Casey wouldn't be the "new OJ" because OJ had factors like his dream team of lawyers, his celebrity status, race, and the Rodney King issue, working in his favor. Casey didn't have any of that! That's why I feel this verdict is more shocking than OJ. I also think there is something fishy going on with it. The jurors will start do make the TV rounds soon, and one of them will let it slip if something was going on, since Juror #14 has already made us suspicious.

MJ mentioned that KC had gained celebrity status in a way; she is one of the most famous women in the world right now. Albeit, infamously so. :crazy:

 

[Solace]

If they didn't verbally, they did with facial expressions, but I cannot believe that 16 jurors during a month of trial did not say a thing. I think they did. The verdict was too quick. They had their minds made up. They were all dressed on the second day before the deliberations betan. So they knew on the second day. Definitely. And how did the alternate agree with them, he was not there during deliberations. He did not deliberate so why his interviews - he did not deliberate and he was supposed to. Obviously, he knew how they felt and they knew how he felt.

 

[Nabbbss]

No wonder the Jurors will not...and CAN not...show their faces.

They KNOW what they've done ------> Stuck their collective finger into
America's eye out of the snide and smug faux-certitude that characterizes
the true acolytes and poltroons of the ethical relativist, secular humanist cadres.

Cowards, all of them.

They KNOW...and they KNEW what they were doing, and anyone who denies
or attempts to diminish the utter and absolute and appalling political
underpinnings and motivations of this Verdict is only fooling himself or herself.

Yes...A political Verdict, just like OJ.

 

[goldenlover]

Too late for a mistrial. It would have meant jury nullification if they had know and could have proved it during the trial.

This guy could have just been attributing his own thoughts to that of the entire jury since they came to the verdict he agreed with. That would explain the pronouns, imoo.

I think people are reading too much into this jurors words. It does sound like since he would have came to the same verdict, he was just using the word "we" because he identified and agreed with the rest of them.

 

[goldenlover]

The judge can't call a mistrial now, but this definitely needs to be investigated and the jurors punished if they did not follow his admonition.

Would you have felt the same way if the verdict had been guilty? Just wondering...

 

[wonders]

On the day the Jury was handed the case July 4th, reporters were commenting on how dressed up they were. Could they have known that day how they were going to vote?
We'll never know, just like we'll never know what happened to Caylee for sure, but I will forever believe that Convicted Felon Casey murdered Caylee.

 

[Bainbridge]

And IIRC Mr.Mason even brought up in open court about the jury wanting to see the heart sticker. So , wouldn't that be on open record ?

Actually, IIRC, CM did use this as a basis for one of the many requests for mistrial. He specifically questioned why the jury as a whole wanted to see the sticker. JP blew it off. I read on another forum that when one jury member has a request it is phrased in court as "we" so that no one is singled out. So if one person requests it, they all have to do it/see it/whatever.

That said, I thought it was interesting if this phrasing was the "norm," why did CM question it? And why did JP blow it off? Makes me very suspicious.

 

[LambChop]

You have to wonder if some sort of tampering was going on. I know for a fact that one of the jurors (female) felt she was guilty.

I think the alternate juror called it as it was. They wrote everything off with the family as severely dysfunctional and that Caylee died as a result of it. Because Caylee's own family did not fight for her they felt no need to go any further than we don't know how Caylee died so therefore let KC go. It was an easy decision based on the opening statement made by JB.

They were not to consider the molestion allegations made by defense in opening because they were not proven and yet the alternate juror said he did. Considering the age of the victum they did not invest the time to search for the truth. They will all be living with their decision. jmo

 

[LambChop]

I think people are reading too much into this jurors words. It does sound like since he would have came to the same verdict, he was just using the word "we" because he identified and agreed with the rest of them.

He could not possibly know what they found compelling to find her not guilty unless it was discussed. He is speaking for the jury as a whole. I think if he were speaking just for himself he would have said my personal belief from the evidence I saw....... He does not even come close to saying that. He is speaking in terms of the jury as a whole's belief was..... Big difference. jmo

 

[cluciano63]

If their intial vote showed they all felt "not guilty" was proven, are they expected to stay in there for days and try to convince each other of guilt?

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

I think people are reading too much into this jurors words. It does sound like since he would have came to the same verdict, he was just using the word "we" because he identified and agreed with the rest of them.

". . . Yes, we all believe, and I'm pretty sure I can say this for all 17 [jurors], there was some sort of horrific accident. The family knows a lot more than what came out at the trial," Hueckler believes, "but [the prosecution] didn't prove that there was a murder."

http://www.wtsp.com/news/local/article/199880/8/Juror-Prosecution-failed-to-prove-murder

IMO, a person who had not spoken one single word to any of the other 16 people wouldn't frame a statement this way. He would have had no idea how they came to their decision nor whether or not they thought it was an accident.

Either the trial was discussed in his presence, against all orders, or else he is guilty of magical thinking. :cow:

 

[rose222]

The jurors would want to dress nice/formally while the verdict is being read.

Ask yourselves this question: can people attached to this case make MORE money with KC behind bars or KC out and about?

 

[rose222]

Can someone in Florida please notify the prosecutors and the Judge about this?

 

[com n sense]

On the day the Jury was handed the case July 4th, reporters were commenting on how dressed up they were. Could they have known that day how they were going to vote?
We'll never know, just like we'll never know what happened to Caylee for sure, but I will forever believe that Convicted Felon Casey murdered Caylee.

I said the same thing. Jean mentioned it on tv.
I think we will know! The truth always comes out.
I have to believe atleast one juror seen the whole truth.

 

[KathrynL]

Would you have felt the same way if the verdict had been guilty? Just wondering...

If they came back in that short of time with guilty on one of the capital counts, I would have wondered. When that first not guilty was read I wasn't surprised because I really didn't expect them to be done that quickly (especially this jury) with guilty on either of the top counts. I did think they would come to 2nd degree or manslaughter though. Not an outright acquittal that quick. By what the alternate says I think they ran with the defense opening statement, and just endured the rest of the trial, and probably did discuss it before deliberations.

:twocents: :cow:

 

[dvdman]

You can't even trust jurors to follow the law these days. That's why I've always said the "Average Joe" has NO business being on a jury. They just don't understand the law and cannot interpret it properly.

 

[nomoresorrow]

(BBM)

I think the alternate juror called it as it was. They wrote everything off with the family as severely dysfunctional and that Caylee died as a result of it. Because Caylee's own family did not fight for her they felt no need to go any further than we don't know how Caylee died so therefore let KC go. It was an easy decision based on the opening statement made by JB.

They were not to consider the molestion allegations made by defense in opening because they were not proven and yet the alternate juror said he did. Considering the age of the victum they did not invest the time to search for the truth. They will all be living with their decision. jmo

I think you've hit the nail on the head Lambchop. Just a "family matter..."