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

[askfornina]

i have heard conflicting reports on that one. some say they had many pieces of evidence in the deliberation room with them, some say they didn't. i wish i had either of these claims substantiated somehow.

 

[goldenlover]

Her mother told a NG producer that ABC gave her whole family a trip to disney world (brothers, sisters, nieces, nephews, etc) - however, someone from ABC denied this.

I hope they did..I think all the jurors deserve a trip to disney world after what they went through. Juror #3 is now fearing for her safety according to HLN and afraid to go home. I thought our society was more civilized than that, but I guess not.

 

[SarahEcho]

I hope that no one on Websleuths supports any of these jurors or Casey Anthony. I hope no one watches or buys any books, interviews, movies etc that at paid to Casey Anthony or to these jurors and I hope people avoid the products from advertizers that are paying out $$ for these pursuits. I wanted to start a thread on this but we can't start threads now. I think we all should avoid watching TV stations that are paying for interviews and avoiding their sponsor's products. Casey Anthony needs to be treated like a pariah, not treated like royalty making millions. I hope and pray that never happens and she is stuck scrubbing floors in some podunk town.

Actually, I do support the jurors. They did their civic duty and gave up many weeks of their lives and made a reasonable decision that was not even based in jury nullification. Whether anyone likes the verdict or not is aside from the point, it's our system and it worked as it ought to.

I will not be made to feel guilty for supporting the system that makes this a great country to live nor will I bash jurors because it's popular.

 

[Bainbridge]

I hope they did..I think all the jurors deserve a trip to disney world after what they went through. Juror #3 is now fearing for her safety according to HLN and afraid to go home. I thought our society was more civilized than that, but I guess not.

I don't know....did you see the hotel they stayed at? I wouldn't complain about being there for 41 days, all expenses paid meals, outings, dessert lady, etc...ok, it was solitary, but it wasn't torturous. They really didn't have it that bad at all.

http://www.wesh.com/r-slideshow/28466997/detail.html

 

[Lilly12]

Interesting...comments and replies from/to poster TLC. Noticed they stopped posting after another poster's comment about jury instructions and notification to State Attorney's office.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/publicsafety/crime/article1178998.ece#comments

Russ Huekler, it was a sacrifice? How big of a sacrifice was it Mr. Huekler? And you want to get to know your wife after only 6 weeks (and I am sure you talked to her during that time). You want to know sacrifice, ask a military man/woman, serving in war torn counties coming home with less limbs they left with and some not coming home at all!!! I AM SORRY BUT I TAKE SUCH EXCEPTION TO THIS MAN SAYING WITH A STRAIGHT FACE, IT WAS A SACRIFICE, and he wants to get to know his wife. Drama. I will concede it was a sacrifice but a very small one of which he could have gotten out of just my saying I think she is guilty and nothing will change my mind. Justice was not served, the fix was in in my opinion. All of this of this post is my opinion.

 

[Bainbridge]

Russ Huekler, it was a sacrifice? How big of a sacrifice was it Mr. Huekler? And you want to get to know your wife after only 6 weeks (and I am sure you talked to her during that time). You want to know sacrifice, ask a military man/woman, serving in war torn counties coming home with less limbs they left with and some not coming home at all!!! I AM SORRY BUT I TAKE SUCH EXCEPTION TO THIS MAN SAYING WITH A STRAIGHT FACE, IT WAS A SACRIFICE, and he wants to get to know his wife. Drama. I will concede it was a sacrifice but a very small one of which he could have gotten out of just my saying I think she is guilty and nothing will change my mind. Justice was not served, the fix was in in my opinion. All of this of this post is my opinion.

I agree with you totally. I thought it was so dramatic. Our military service people - THAT is sacrifice. It's like that old adage - someone crying about having no shoes and then passing a man with no feet.

 

[Lilly12]

I don't know....did you see the hotel they stayed at? I wouldn't complain about being there for 41 days, all expenses paid meals, outings, dessert lady, etc...ok, it was solitary, but it wasn't torturous. They really didn't have it that bad at all.

http://www.wesh.com/r-slideshow/28466997/detail.html

wow, just wow. Like you I would not mind staying there, and to get paid to boot. I know it was not much, but all things considered. moo

 

[askfornina]

i have heard conflicting reports on that one. some say they had many pieces of evidence in the deliberation room with them, some say they didn't. i wish i had either of these claims substantiated somehow.

quoted because i want someone to give me info (actual source) one way or another if they actually had all or some evidence in the room or if they had to specifically ask for evidence.

 

[rose222]

Russ Huekler, it was a sacrifice? How big of a sacrifice was it Mr. Huekler? And you want to get to know your wife after only 6 weeks (and I am sure you talked to her during that time). You want to know sacrifice, ask a military man/woman, serving in war torn counties coming home with less limbs they left with and some not coming home at all!!! I AM SORRY BUT I TAKE SUCH EXCEPTION TO THIS MAN SAYING WITH A STRAIGHT FACE, IT WAS A SACRIFICE, and he wants to get to know his wife. Drama. I will concede it was a sacrifice but a very small one of which he could have gotten out of just my saying I think she is guilty and nothing will change my mind. Justice was not served, the fix was in in my opinion. All of this of this post is my opinion.

Lilly12...I agree with you 100%

 

[Lilly12]

What makes me so suspicious of these jurors is, it is all twelve, even some of the alternates (maybe all) not one, not one, with all the evidence presented, could give Caylee a little justice, so that her life would not be in vain. What was it Bill S. said, in 30 years he never seen a stronger circumstantial case, or words to that effect. You will never convince me that the fix was not in. Not with all the evidence. Their motive in my opinion is money. A guilty verdict would not serve their purpose. As always my opinion. I am truly disgusted.

 

[Lilly12]

Exactly. There is no way, absolutely NO WAY that those jurors..all 12...walked into that jury room each thinking the same thing. Not Guilty. Just as there would have been no way they walked into that room each and every one of them thinking Guilty. Not gonna happen. 12 people COMPLETELY agreeing on everything? Nahhhhhhhh.

I so agree. you said it better then I. moo

 

[Bainbridge]

What makes me so suspicious of these jurors is, it is all twelve, even some of the alternates (maybe all) not one, not one, with all the evidence presented, could give Caylee a little justice, so that her life would not be in vain. What was it Bill S. said, in 30 years he never seen a stronger circumstantial case, or words to that effect. You will never convince me that the fix was not in. Not with all the evidence. Their motive in my opinion is money. A guilty verdict would not serve their purpose. As always my opinion. I am truly disgusted.

OMG, if I could 'like' this 10 times, I would. There were periods of time during jury selection when they were allowed to go home. Of course the judge said, do not talk about it, read about it, watch it, etc - do you REALLY think they followed this? They are only human, after all. I think it was one person who lit the spark and the rest followed through with the fix. Probably #6, seeing as he has television and media experience, and apparently enough b*lls to request six figures for an interview.

 

[Lilly12]

OMG, if I could 'like' this 10 times, I would. There were periods of time during jury selection when they were allowed to go home. Of course the judge said, do not talk about it, read about it, watch it, etc - do you REALLY think they followed this? They are only human, after all. I think it was one person who lit the spark and the rest followed through with the fix. Probably #6, seeing as he has television and media experience, and apparently enough b*lls to request six figures for an interview.

You make a great point about juror #6 with t.v. and media experience.
My fervent wish is for one of the juror to develop a conscious and come forward with "the plot." I am sure (those with a conscious) convinced themselves that they was not enough evidence, while in the jury room, perhaps pressured by others. Maybe in the light of day they can realize what went down and report it. I can only hope, in fact that is the only hope I have left in this case. My opinion only

 

[TexasLori]

Having served on a jury, I will tell you from personal experience that the jurors most certainly do discuss the case contrary to the Judge's orders. In fact, I was one of just two on this jury who refused to participate in lunch recess discussions and was asked by one of my fellow jurors why I didn't want to talk about the case. I looked around the table at each person and then said, "Because we've been instructed by the Judge to not discuss the case."

The following morning, I stopped to use the restroom before heading to the jury room. When I arrived, there was dead silence in the room, and I immediately noticed that the group had obviously played musical chairs and were no longer seated in their little clicques. I think they were afraid that I had gone to speak to the Judge about the ongoing discussions.

Wow. That is all I can say. Wow. Good for you.

I have never served on a jury and have no idea the workings of what goes on. This shouldn't surprise me but it does.

 

[Sweet Fox]

Russ Huekler, it was a sacrifice? How big of a sacrifice was it Mr. Huekler? And you want to get to know your wife after only 6 weeks (and I am sure you talked to her during that time). You want to know sacrifice, ask a military man/woman, serving in war torn counties coming home with less limbs they left with and some not coming home at all!!! I AM SORRY BUT I TAKE SUCH EXCEPTION TO THIS MAN SAYING WITH A STRAIGHT FACE, IT WAS A SACRIFICE, and he wants to get to know his wife. Drama. I will concede it was a sacrifice but a very small one of which he could have gotten out of just my saying I think she is guilty and nothing will change my mind. Justice was not served, the fix was in in my opinion. All of this of this post is my opinion.

Thank you, thank you, thank you. Well said and I couldn't agree more.

 

[IzzyBlanche]

Here is another reason I think they talked.

I have been on two juries and the absolute worst part for me was not being able to talk about the cases. It was such a relief when we were finally released to deliberate and allowed to talk.

Yet the LAST thing this jury appeared to want to do was talk about the case. Ten-something hours of "deliberations" after such a long trial with so much evidence? Not a word to the media afterward?

No, they were plenty talked out by the time the "deliberations" began.

They're only talking now because of the public outrage.

MOO of course.

 

[sumzero]

What was it Bill S. said, in 30 years he never seen a stronger circumstantial case, or words to that effect. .

I have to agree with Bill S. It was a difficult case (i.e., being a "dry bones" case). But the prosecutors did a remarkable job. And they had some excellent witnesses -- the M.E., for example. Dr. Vass. The techs who examined the computer. This VERY STRONG CAST (IMO) clearly established that a murder, not an accident, had occurred. It clearly established that KC carted around a dead body in her trunk. It clearly identified KC as the author of the "cholorform" searches (84 of them!). It clearly identified the (unusual) presence of chloroform in the same location as the corpse (i.e., the trunk). Then the duct tape: the duct tape almost certainly held the jaw in place (long after decomposition).

And time after time, the defense witnesses seemed to corroborate the testimony of the prosecution's witnesses. KC was the only one with a real motive and opportunity to extinguish this small life. Her lies were designed IMO to cover up the truth: that she had murdered her child. It might have been a circumstantial case, but the circumstances definitely fit the prosecution's, not the defense's, theory. I'm still at a loss to explain the jury's decision.

 

[smartsass]

What makes me so suspicious of these jurors is, it is all twelve, even some of the alternates (maybe all) not one, not one, with all the evidence presented, could give Caylee a little justice, so that her life would not be in vain. What was it Bill S. said, in 30 years he never seen a stronger circumstantial case, or words to that effect. You will never convince me that the fix was not in. Not with all the evidence. Their motive in my opinion is money. A guilty verdict would not serve their purpose. As always my opinion. I am truly disgusted.

Hi,

I have wondered about this too and I'm not sure if it's just my jaded thinking or if there's grounds for this thought. Can you share either here or in PM why you feel there'd be a fix, how it was done, etc?

TYIA!

 

[mrye4709]

I am pleased with the media that are reporting that the evidence was there, that they watched and there was very little notes taken, that they don't think these jurors did their jobs. I hope they are all watching. This wasn't traffic court, this was a DP murder trial and it would have been nice if they had taken it serious and not sluffed it off like it was nothing. I hope their friends and family can explain the mountain of evidence they seen (you know they watched the trial). I hope they can live with themselves...wait, no I hope they can't. Let this be a lesson for any potential future jurors, we will not let you slide.

When I worked, I learned that the better you treat someone the worse they treat you. I hope Judge Perry learned that lesson too. Maybe he was too nice to them.....

 

[~PrinceSSa~]

Without a doubt they discussed the case! Funny cause they weren't ever listening!

I agree. Thank you.
And we know from the tweets that the jurors hardly took notes. How do you compare and discuss a six week trial in just 10 hours?? :crazy: