Did the jury get it wrong, or...

[AMMich]

I am sorry but I 100% believe that ANY mother, whose child ends up dead, in a swamp with duct tape on its face and was never reported missing by the mother deserves to do jail time. I cannot wrap my head around the jurors thinking on this. It doesn't matter to me even if it was an accident, it is at the very minimum gross negligence in protecting that child. There is no good reason that is not criminal for the horrible disposal of poor Caylee's body.

Maybe I don't understand the jury process but if I was on the jury and I felt that there wasn't 100% evidence to prove first degree murder but I knew she killed her, I would use my power as a juror and convict her with a lesser charge to ensure Caylee gets justice.

 

[R.U.Kidding!]

Now the jury foreman talked to Greta and says that since the prosecution didnt have the cause of death, the law required them to acquit her of all charges.

That is patently untrue. He is trying to convince people that they had no choice, and he is either lying or really stupid. I think everyone here knows you do not need an exact cause of death to convict of murder. I am mad that when jurors say completely untrue things, none of the reporters point it out. Why not?????? Greta was a lawyer right, she should know that is false. The interview hasnt aired yet, it airs tonight, but I have a feeling she will not call him out on it. The more I hear, the sicker I get.

A murder case should require people of at least average or above average intelligence. There has to be a way. How can we trust something as important as a human life (Casey's, and the one of her next murder victim) to people who don't understand the law? It was explained to them clearly, but let's face it, some people don;t have the capacity to learn, no matter how much it is explained to them.

Well, Solange, now we know! Look at the foreman--No Rocket Scientist!

 

[Solange82200]

The crazy part is that the prosecution DID tell them how Caylee died. She was chloroformed and duct tape. The murder weapon was there, the duct tape was stuck to part of the skull, and there was chloroform in the car. Although the ME wasnt able to say the cause of death based on only the skeleton, the prosecution was still able to tell them how she died based on the duct tape, chloroform, trunk, and computer searches. I think to say that they were not told HOW she died is a lie, they were. And the evidence fit perfectly.

At the end of the day they should ask themselves this: Is there any other reasonable conclusion that fits ALL the evidence? Drowning may fit some of it, but not all of it: duct tape, chloroform searches, Casey;s behavior, her knowing that Caylee would be dead that night when she told her mom she was going to spend the night with Zanny, but told Tony she would be with him... Those pieces of evidence do NOT fit with an accidental drowning scenario... So even if you dont believe George that Caylee was alive when she left with Casey, you still have plenty of other evidence saying this was not an accidental drowning. So what are we left with? Murder. That is it. There is no other logical explanation.

 

[Sweet Fox]

The miserable postscript for a Casey Anthony juror

http://fieldnotes.msnbc.msn.com/_ne...iserable-postscript-for-a-casey-anthony-juror

is it wrong that I can't muster up even a little sympathy ?

Huh?? According to this article, juror #12 is in her 60's and works at Publix Grocery. Something is WRONG here.

According to numerous published lists, Juror #12 was a female in her 40's who worked at a daycare center.

 

[jjenny]

If no cause of death meant not guilty, we better contact Scott Peterson. No doubt he is tired of sitting on death row. The exact cause of death obviously isn't necessary for a conviction. In some cases, there was no body found at all, yet the jury would be able to come back with a guilty verdict.

 

[technicalconfusion]

Sorry above comment meant for "TECH CON"

Eh? Are you expecting me to connect the dots? Not sure I can today - I was in the er with my mom all nite.

 

[Tiki]

I just can't get over the fact that they did not follow the judge's instructions. How is that not one of them heard when the judge clearly stated that the SA did not have to prove COD or motive? From what the Jury foreman has told GVS, it seems that's all they considered!

I would have hung the jury. HHPB would have instructed to try again, but, sorry, the state would have had to try the case over. I would not have been "convinced" or bullied into giving in to a verdict I felt was wrong.

Oh - and, in addition, I would have insisted that the jury instructions be read and reread until everyone understood. HHPB was available if questions needed to be answered.

[in addition to covering the monitor when evidence was being shown, some jurors appeared to be sleeping or at least close to it. Some of them took no notes at all.

.

 

[Astrella613]

I never expected her to get the death penalty. Just because she is a pretty young thing. But the way this female juror JF has been talking, as if the jury believed they only had a choice between the death penalty and setting Casey free. It makes no sense. Even with first degree murder conviction they wouldn't have to give Casey the death penalty. And I don't believe that manslaughter or child abuse are even eligible for the death penalty.

I wonder if that is what they thought. ONly two choices. I've never been on a jury but even I know better than that. I guess it's possible though.

 

[Tiki]

I wonder if that is what they thought. ONly two choices. I've never been on a jury but even I know better than that. I guess it's possible though.

It seems that maybe was what they were told by the jury foreman, according to what the GVS interview is quoted as saying.

"But because the prosecution never showed how it happened, they were -- by the letter of the law -- forced to rule for acquittal on all murder charges."

http://www.myfoxatlanta.com/dpp/news/national/Jury-Foreman-Talks-About-Casey-Anthony-Trial-20110711-am-sd

.

 

[yolorado]

If no cause of death meant not guilty, we better contact Scott Peterson. No doubt he is tired of sitting on death row. The exact cause of death obviously isn't necessary for a conviction. In some cases, there was no body found at all, yet the jury would be able to come back with a guilty verdict.

We had a similar case here where the father was convicted and there was not even a body ever found...so no autopsy, so not even "manner" of death, let alone specific cause. Google Aarone Thompson for more info. She's another little one who went missing without ever being missed, never reported gone. Social worker goes into home to check up on family and notices that family is a kid short. Blended family, one full sibling, lots of steps, maybe 5 or 6. Dad says about 5 or 6 year old JUST THEN left in huff because he didn't give her a cookie. Stepmom agrees but some of the siblings don't even remember the last time they saw her...like maybe it was a year ago, maybe more. They thought maybe she went to live with her biomom somewhere. Biomom is in homeless shelter hundreds and hundreds of miles away, hasn't seen and hasn't been allowed to speak to her daughter for at least a year, maybe more. Aarone lived with her Dad and stepmom and hadn't been to visit biomom. Family had been getting benefit payments for child, but they didn't seem to have any clothes for her in the house, or bed for her to sleep. She'd never been enrolled in school. In the only pictures her "parents" could produce, she looked much younger than the age she should have been. She couldn't be found in any recent group pictures of family. It took a while, but father was eventually convicted and sentenced to 50 years. There was extensive testimony about child abuse by the siblings but no cause of death. He was found innocent of abuse of a corpse, but of course, none had ever been located. His wife had died of a heart attack earlier.

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/21136086/detail.html

Thompson was found guilty of child abuse resulting in death in the disappearance and presumed death of his daughter, Aarone.He was also found guilty of conspiracy to commit child abuse, false reporting to authorities, concealing death, conspiracy to conceal death, child abuse resulting in injury, contributing to the delinquency of a minor and other charges. ....

Juror No. 2019 agreed -- Thompson killed his daughter, although prosecutors never said exactly how.

 

[Astrella613]

Well, Solange, now we know! Look at the foreman--No Rocket Scientist!

Well to begin with, how do they find 12 people in this country, much less this state, that knew so little about this case. Either they lied or they are not well informed. I don't know of anyone who has no or very little knowledge of this case.

 

[Astrella613]

It seems that maybe was what they were told by the jury foreman, according to what the GVS interview is quoted as saying.

"But because the prosecution never showed how it happened, they were -- by the letter of the law -- forced to rule for acquittal on all murder charges."

http://www.myfoxatlanta.com/dpp/news/national/Jury-Foreman-Talks-About-Casey-Anthony-Trial-20110711-am-sd

.

So, they would just go along with that? Hard to believe.

 

[jjenny]

In Nina Reiser's case, there was no body found when her husband was convicted. After he was convicted, he revealed the location of the body in exchange for a lesser sentence. So that'd be another free man today if cause of death was necessary in order to find guilt.

 

[jjenny]

So, they would just go along with that? Hard to believe.

I am not sure as to what else are we supposed to believe? It's clear to me the child didn't put herself into a garbage bag and then hopped into the swamp. But based on what the jurors that have been interviewed said, apparently they expected the prosecution to tell them the exact cause of death.
Which clearly isn't possible with skeletal remains, unless there were stab or bullet wounds (which there weren't in this case).

 

[3doglady]

It seems that maybe was what they were told by the jury foreman, according to what the GVS interview is quoted as saying.

"But because the prosecution never showed how it happened, they were -- by the letter of the law -- forced to rule for acquittal on all murder charges."

http://www.myfoxatlanta.com/dpp/news/national/Jury-Foreman-Talks-About-Casey-Anthony-Trial-20110711-am-sd

.

What "letter of the law" was he reading? I can't believe how this jury continues to go on national tv and tries to explain their actions by voicing their ignorance of the law.

 

[Astrella613]

I am not sure as to what else are we supposed to believe? It's clear to me the child didn't put herself into a garbage bag and then hopped into the swamp. But based on what the jurors that have been interviewed said, apparently they expected the prosecution to tell them the exact cause of death.
Which clearly isn't possible with skeletal remains, unless there were stab or bullet wounds (which there weren't in this case).

But if that was needed, they would have never been able to bring charges against her so that doesn't make sense to me.

 

[jjenny]

But if that was needed, they would have never been able to bring charges against her so that doesn't make sense to me.

Of course the exact cause of death isn't needed. There have been people put on trial without any body at all, like in Nina Reiser's case. There was no body, he denied it, yet he was found guilty of first degree murder. After being found guilty, he revealed the location of the body in order to get a lesser sentence.

 

[back2back19]

I am not sure as to what else are we supposed to believe? It's clear to me the child didn't put herself into a garbage bag and then hopped into the swamp. But based on what the jurors that have been interviewed said, apparently they expected the prosecution to tell them the exact cause of death.
Which clearly isn't possible with skeletal remains, unless there were stab or bullet wounds (which there weren't in this case).

I think they expected/wanted a video. They didn;'t feel it was their job to connect the dots or to look at the evidence. These people did NOT do their job. I would get it and accept it much easier if they said they went through the evidence but simply did not believe there was enough evidence. It just ain't happening here. They wanted proof beyond any and all doubt and were not going to convict her of anything.

 

[theBritster]

I think they expected/wanted a video. They didn;'t feel it was their job to connect the dots or to look at the evidence. These people did NOT do their job. I would get it and accept it much easier if they said they went through the evidence but simply did not believe there was enough evidence. It just ain't happening here. They wanted proof beyond any and all doubt and were not going to convict her of anything. They probably do think Caylee put herself in the garbage bags and rolled herself into the swamp.

That's exactly how I feel. I was horrified at the verdict but I wasn't agnry at the jurors. Even though I thought there was plenty of evidence I thought that maybe it just wasn't enough for them. But now I keep seeing what they've been saying and it makes me so angry. In the end, they were just ignorant of the law and lazy!

I'd like to think some good could come from this mess, even if it's just a change to the jury system, but I really don't think anything will happen. Makes me so sad!

 

[Hisimage]

Someone posted a while back what I thought was an excellent point.
I have no doubt Caylee loved to swim. Now I have 2 girls and we have a swimming pool and we took all precautions the A's did with the locks on the doors and such. No need to move a ladder because our pool is ingound.

One of the favorite parts of swimming that my girls loved was the whole ritual of getting on their swimsuits, lifejackets/wings and swimming goggles. That whole ritual itself would take quite a while.

Her theory (I'm almost sure it was misslegal) was that Caylee would have tried to put her swimsuit on. I agree--- I don't think she would have climed the ladder in her clothing. I really believe that no matter how much she loved to swim and she did most every day, she would have tried to get her jacket and swimsuit on. Surely, somebody would have caught her by then. I also believe the only time she would get in that pool is with Grandma. I have doubts that Ms. Felon would have done much swimming with her . I don't know why, but I just can't see her getting suited up to hang out with her daughter.