Did the jury get it wrong, or...

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

Did the jury get it wrong?

  • The jury got it wrong

    Votes: 1,051 81.9%

  • The state didn't prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt

    Votes: 179 14.0%

  • The Defense provided reasonable doubt and the jury got it right

    Votes: 55 4.3%

  • Other

    Votes: 31 2.4%
  • Total voters
    1,283
  • Poll closed .

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
samhunt said:
I agree with you about them just being a family with a lazy, lying daughter. Seems like almost all the dysfunction in the family was caused by Casey being a sociopath.

I think the jury didn't like George Anthony and made assumptions because of that. Juror #3 talked about how she didn't believe him because he wasn't cooperative with the defense or prosecution. To me it made complete sense under the circumstances why he would act like that. The prosecution is going for the death penalty for his daughter, the defense is blaming it on him, and his granddaughter that he loved is dead. Of course he doesn't like any of it!
Click to expand...
I can see why they found George strange because I do, too. However, for once I didn't hold it against him because Baez was asking him the most ridiculous questions. He didn't just ask him "Did you molest Casey?" He was asking him, "You wouldn't admit that you molested Casey, would you?" That question is assuming George is guilty of molestation, and if he answers it "yes" or "no," he is basically admitting to molesting Casey! Even I, not a George fan at all, couldn't blame him for getting a little testy about being asked questions like that.
Nenato5 said:
Juror #3 was not credible IMHO--no surprise though.

http://www.pcsoweb.com/InmateBooking/SubjectResults.aspx?id=1410423
Click to expand...
Hmm. Might identify with Casey a little bit? Sorry if that was out of line, but really. She probably has to admit that to the Florida board of nursing before she can get a license.
 
I think, George's supposingly mistress, helped the jury decide the not guilty verdict. George saying "It was an accident that got out of control"..Sealed the fate ! This created doubt on Casey's role. I still believe had the jurors really listened to the jail tapes..all the documents..they should have come up with at least guilty of murder, but the premeditated part could be eliminated.
 
During the hearing I go a phone call from my sister to tell me that her baby granddaughter was born this morning - a sign that life goes on.

Perfect timing!
 
There is good legal foundation for the jurors decision, that's the end of it, no matter our personal feelings about it. They did their job.
 
The longer a trial goes on, with the more and more minutia, IMHO, the more likely it is the jury will pick apart the evidence to the point that they convince themselves it's not true, it doesn't add up.

This case went on way way way too long, and left the jurors muddle headed.
 
The jury may have done their job, but they did a terrible job, and used no logic at all.
 
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gOrw1nCIx4E"]Makeup Tips: Casey Anthony Look[/ame]
 
i am still convinced these jurors were too stupid to understand the complexity of the information they were given. it is literally like they didn't understand the forensics so they threw them out completely instead of TRYING to understand them. this is why professional jurors - at least a few - are a good idea.
 
Okay. Was just in the jury support thread and have some comments on some of the supposed justification. Someone wrote:

***********
You are ignoring the fact that the defense contested all of these issues with circumstantial evidence of their own:

*touch DNA on duct tape not a match to Caylee or Casey
*insignificant levels of chloroform in the trunk
*witnesses (including LE) who smelled nothing or not decomp from the trunk
*grief expert (31 days)

Read the jury instructions...when evidence conflicts: reasonable doubt.
************

Wondering if they troubled to read and understand the jury instructions at all. Based on what the alternate is saying and what #3 is saying, they based much of their decision on George and on Baez' opening statement which they were repeatedly told WAS NOT EVIDENCE. As to the other points, the DNA was shown to have been contamination in the lab and not evidence of a third party involved in the crime, 'was it not'? And 'insignificant levels of chloroform'? That does not even bear remark. As to the people who did not smell anything, I submit that several of those people were near the trunk BEFORE the odor would have developed. And the grief 'expert'... sheesh. None of that IMO rises to the level of actually disproving state's evidence.

Additionally, it was beyond cheeky that Baez brought that stupid 'imaginary friends' poster into his closing. He was trying to say that ICA had mental issues without having any mental health experts to testify to such. Because? NPD and APD are personality disorders that do not constitute mental illness and as such are not reasons to excuse criminal acts.

Got to hand it JB. Much as I find him loathsome, dude is crazy like a fox.
 
What confuses me most about the jury's decision is that they accepted reasonable doubt about a pathological liar's version of events, rather that believe the evidence of so many professionals. All the defense showed was that Caylee could have possibly gotten in the pool alone. Everything else just went out the window. Will they ever read any of the discovery? Will they ever know that the first time we heard about an accidental drowning was during opening statements? Will they ever question why she would spend three years in jail rather than confess to an accident? I have so many questions that will probably never be answered! Still so heartbroken!
 
bananarama said:
What confuses me most about the jury's decision is that they accepted reasonable doubt about a pathological liar's version of events, rather that believe the evidence of so many professionals. All the defense showed was that Caylee could have possibly gotten in the pool alone. Everything else just went out the window. Will they ever read any of the discovery? Will they ever know that the first time we heard about an accidental drowning was during opening statements? Will they ever question why she would spend three years in jail rather than confess to an accident? I have so many questions that will probably never be answered! Still so heartbroken!
Click to expand...

This BBM...exactly what I can not get past .
 
They were at 6-6 for manslaughter and the ones who felt she was guilty basically just gave up without fighting it! I don't feel bad for them to have to live with this decision. They fell into JB's ridiculous trap and accusations of abuse without evidence, but didn't see the ACTUAL evidence for what it was. This article makes me even more angry.

http://www.tampabay.com/incoming/article1179177.ece
 
All Juror 3 was worried about was not being able to do what she wanted and that she was tired and stressed. Sickening comments from a juror. Hardly any significant and dedicated comments in this interview. Sounds like it was one big PIA for her. She says she did her civil duty and now she wants to get on with her life. Really??? No wonder people take plea deals even when they're innocent?? Imagine depending on someone like this? (Yes, it worked for ICA but she is GUILTY!!)
http://www.wftv.com/video/28471955/index.html
 
Serjen said:
They were at 6-6 for manslaughter and the ones who felt she was guilty basically just gave up without fighting it! I don't feel bad for them to have to live with this decision. They fell into JB's ridiculous trap and accusations of abuse without evidence, but didn't see the ACTUAL evidence for what it was. This article makes me even more angry.

http://www.tampabay.com/incoming/article1179177.ece
Click to expand...

What makes me angry is that the prosecution wanted the opening statement to be stricken and for JBP to instruct the jurors to not consider it because of no evidence being presented by the defense and his response was "if they remember they remember, if they don't they don't" That was a big mistake on JBP part because they remembered!!
 
Serjen said:
They were at 6-6 for manslaughter and the ones who felt she was guilty basically just gave up without fighting it! I don't feel bad for them to have to live with this decision. They fell into JB's ridiculous trap and accusations of abuse without evidence, but didn't see the ACTUAL evidence for what it was. This article makes me even more angry.

http://www.tampabay.com/incoming/article1179177.ece
Click to expand...

Sickening! They only fought for her for what? An hour or 2? They knew they were going to have a verdict the next day since they were all dreessed up. They just wanted to go home! It wasn't important enough for them to spend more time fighting for Caylee's justice. Sickening....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 165 more.
Total: 412 (members: 166, guests: 246)

Online statistics

Members online
166
Guests online
246
Total visitors
412
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,796
Messages
18,245,917
Members
234,453
Latest member
philyphil3737373
Back
Top