Did the jury get it wrong, or...

[boogiebear]

As much as I disliked this decision, I am appalled at some of the reactions on facebook(not on here) and other places. People are out and out threatening the jury. That is unexceptable, and unAmerican. We as Americans have the right to tell someone that we think they are an idiot, but we do not have the right to threaten them, their health, family, grandkids, or anything else. Some people need to get a grip.

 

[suzyq211]

A juror is supposed to bring "life's experience" to the deliberation. To me, lying about EVERY single thing in the disappearance of a child tells me of guilt. Am I wrong?

 

[Robinez]

I wonder how Amy and TonE and Jesse are all feeling today.

I heard either from JVM or NG that Jesse Grund is "shocked" by the verdict and will be on their show tonight. I am sorry for not knowing which one said it. I am still reeling from the verdict and my thought's are a bit jumbled right now.

TC, Robinullhair:

 

[Angleena]

The state failed to prove their case.

The state claimed the murder weapon was duct tape. So what do you do, you "follow the duct tape".

The defense connected the duct tape to George, over and over again.

How many times did the state connect the duct tape to Casey?

Did the state even ask questions about who had access to the duct tape, was it locked up where only one or a few could get to it, was it missing or moved, had it been used recently or had it been collecting dirt on the torn end?

I can't really fault the state for not asking those questions though. They didn't find that duct tape when they searched the Anthony home so that closed the door to questioning about it or even testimony on it. The problem rested on George's shoulders, he closed the door on them so they couldn't ask him questions like that. He wouldn't claim the same brand of duct tape at the command center as being his or acknowledging any memory of that particular duct tape...that shuts the state completely out and in the eyes of the jury, makes George look like he is trying to disassociate himself from the duct tape (the murder weapon).

A juror is going to ask themselves how often Casey was connected to the duct tape and they saw George disassociate himself from it and they have to ask themselves why?

As far as the verdict goes, Not guilty does not mean the same thing as innocent. Not guilty simply means the evidence wasn't enough to support the claim - but it doesn't mean it didn't happen.

 

[sheri21]

That's what really floors me. They ALL heard what they heard and ALL agreed within just hours on a not guilty verdict. How could that be? How could there not be any dissent at all? I do not understand at all. How can 12 different people come to the same (IMO misguided) decision within hours? Not even one holdout, nothing? (That would probably be a lot of pressure to be a lone holdout, BTW.) snipped by me
.

That's like asking how could the holocaust happen? People are sheep. And far too many are not very intelligent. If you can't see it, feel it, SMELL it, some people don't understand. Not many deep thinkers on that jury, IMO!

I know I shouldn't but I hope they are shunned within their communities for a little bit. Maybe take a class in higher level thinking with their free time.

 

[BlOnDe_GuRrL]

Did anyone else notice how she smiled at #10 when the clerk was polling the jury?

 

[Pinksy]

I believe the reason this case was lost by the State is because there were two people on trial. George and Casey. George never should have been accused of this crime. This jury forgot who was on trial here IMO.

This is my first post, and I have to say that I couldn't agree more. This jury had George in the back of their minds the entire time, thanks to the DT.

I believe the reason they came to their decision is the fact that George was the last person to see KC and Caylee alive. They didn't believe a word George said and Casey didn't testify. (And really who could blame them as the entire family lies.)

Thus, they completely disregarded George's testimony. They knew he was a former LE. They believed he had the knowledge to cover up evidence. And with him being the last one to see both KC and Caylee alive, they had doubt. Therefore, they could not find KC guilty of any of the charges.

This is not the fault of the jurors. This defense plan was in the works before Caylee's remains were even found. George and Cindy knew this was the plan from the very start. In essence this was the perfect murder and coverup.

This jury believed KC did it, but there was enough doubt thanks to George and Cindy Anthony; and the lack of forensic evidence.

Both GA and CA should be tried with Perjury and Obstruction of Justice. But it would be useless, as KC could hypothetically take the stand in their defense and admit to the crime. (And the state could do absolutely nothing about it thanks to Double Jeopardy.)

 

[Trvl4Lyfe]

State didn't prove their case. I knew they were being too relaxed about it.

 

[thumbtack]

Fox TV had one of the alternate jurors on. He said the state did not show motive & that ICA appeared to be a great mom. When asked if chloroform computer searches meant anything, he just said "no."

 

[GarAndTeed]

I am seriously lacking confidence about anything!

((((((((((((((((((((Gitana)))))))))))))))))))))))))
Sorry, I don't know how to copy quote & WS is so busy...but I just wanted to say I *really* appreciate your input, and I truly hope you won't allow this craziness to affect your confidence. You have so much to offer. I'm not an atty, but I feel like I've been thrown into The Twilight Zone. Sometimes life just makes no sense (IMHO).

 

[boogiebear]

BBM
That's the part that gets me the worst. You can make OUTLANDISH claims in your OS and never back up a single one of them in court and create reasonable double. Unbelievable! What's wrong with a system that allows this?

We have worked ourselves into a system where we only allow people on juries who do not keep up on current events, and care little to nothing about their communities, because we do not want anyone who could possibly prejudge the case. We then end up surprised when we get an outrageous verdict from uneducated, uninspired, and uninvolved(not being involved, instead of not evolved or advanced) individuals. Somehow in this country we need to accept that if an intelligent caring person who knows about the case, can access themselves saying they are able to judge fairly, then we need to believe them. In this case I could not have judged fairly, but I could have in OJ's case.

 

[burbqueen]

I agree angeleena completely. The state did the best they could with what they had. I think those that have been following the case for years knew more than the jury. I also think that a lot of people on here were swayed by their emotions and u really have too look at the evidence from the jurys point of view. I really think they were hung up on how caylee died and missed the point.

 

[kgeaux]

Wait until they hear ALL of the evidence.

Why do you think the prosecution failed to present all of the evidence?

 

[Wholehearted]

BBM. No doubt. You may get away with murdering a 2-year-old child in FL, but you'll never get away with tax evasion.

This actually made me laugh. It's nice to have a moment of levity. Thanks.

 

[Shar824]

RSBM

THAT is what bothers me so badly. There was never a shred of evidence to support the defense's opening statement (and PLENTY to refute it)... yet that seems to be exactly what they based their verdict on. They certainly didn't base it on the evidence. Baby Caylee didn't wrap duct tape around her own face, wrap her own self in bags, lay in the trunk a day or two and then bail out to finish up in the swamp.

BBM

Apparently the jurors seem to think she did.

 

[OneLostGrl]

I think George made himself look guilty...he just could not give a straight answer to JB-maybe he was trying to make a statement, i.e. telling Casey to f*&^ off, but it backfired for the state, IMO.

ita.. the way he kept resisting with that darn duct tape on the gas cans. He never gave a straight answer for anything. He did look guilty I don't care what anyone says, the man acted like he was trying to hide something.

 

[legalmania]

Surprise Surprise!!!

 

[gitana1]

Gitana, what do you think about the jury returning it's verdict relatively quickly? That seems to say the state had serious problems with it's case.

I lost my earlier reply to this. I agree. And I wrote that i felt motive was not proved enough. That really bothered me during the case. I felt they should have put on evidence that Tony Lazzaro did not allow Caylee to spend the night and did not want kids, especially girl children. But, after a couple of days worrying about it, I glossed over it and felt they had enough.

I know motive is not necessary legally, but in actuality, it is. I talked about that on here when it happened (or didn't happen). When the gave their closing, i felt motive was lacking, but I still thought they had enough. But...

Fox TV had one of the alternate jurors on. He said the state did not show motive & that ICA appeared to be a great mom. When asked if chloroform computer searches meant anything, he just said "no."

I guess I was wrong. They did not have enough. Motive was not shown to them.

 

[susan1122]

I think George made himself look guilty...he just could not give a straight answer to JB-maybe he was trying to make a statement, i.e. telling Casey to f*&^ off, but it backfired for the state, IMO.

If he did have an affair he should have admitted to it. It would have gone a long way in showing his credibility. If he did have the affair was he lying because he was still lying to Cindy? questions....questions......

 

[nomoresorrow]

Yes, this jury got it so wrong and Casey will go on to victimize even more people. Not only will she continue to steal, she will kill again and the jury will THEN know just how wrong they got it. Guess it's okay as long as it's not them or their friends/family that are victimized by her.