Did the jury get it wrong, or...

[natsound]

You seriously don't think JB passed letters to/from the A's and Casey? You don't think he let her communicate with them through his laptop which he got special permission to bring into the prison?

Well, you are probably right. The question is which came first the chicken or the egg? The defense theory or the theory born out of 3 years worth of real life drama that was EVIDENTLY crafted from record events. The whole Krystal Holloway thing was discussed here ad naseum. It was widely believed that was done for the media to garner sympathy for George. After all, he was in close contact with the defense team at that time, hell he even called JB from the motel.

Here's what I think: KC refused contact with her parents at some point in her jail stay, probably because she and JB knew at that point they would have to turn on a family member. At first they were considering pointing the finger at Jesse Grund, and CA loved that idea.

The conspiracy theory is simply being taken too far. KC is the product of two loony, lying parents who didn't get along. GA got pretty friendly with KH. Whether they slept together or not, I don't know. The suspect text message tells me they flirted and enjoyed each other's company. How would the relationship with KH garner sympathy from the media? Let alone the fact GA didn't need sympathy from the media. Everyone with half a brain knew the one and only responsible party here was... and is... KC.

A covert conspiracy with the Anthonys and JB/KC that worked perfectly in the end, and fooled everyone until now? How smart do you think these people are?

 

[3doglady]

@bobkealing bob kealing
At 6pm on @WESH former #CaseyAnthony trial judge Stan Strickland: "i don't think there was reasonable doubt."

I love JSS. He's not afraid to tell it like it is. "The irony is rich.":rocker:

 

[R.U.Kidding!]

I know I will be disturbed by this verdict for a very long time, but it is FINAL, and we have to live with the knowledge "She walks away FREE". Although that is so very hard for me to accept, as with most, I have always believed "things happen for a reason"

Let us hope the public outrage over this verdict and the jury's "STUPID" commentary will influence future jurors to take this responsibility very seriously, and never "settle" for anything less than their conscience will allow. The jurors in this case will forever be the "example" of a failure in the justice system . They will get their "Book Deals", unfortunately it will be in Law precedent, where educators can refer to them as the" system failure" they were.

 

[JBean]

JBean,

I have a question---would the fact that Caylees death was not reported for 31 day's (even by accident) be enough evidence to prove "NEGLIGENCE" on the part of Casey the mother and caregiver of child? That pretty much proved it to me. Thus my reasoning for at least aggravated manslaughter. I do believe the State "reached " on the 1st degree--premeditation, but feel their was plenty of evidence of negligence.
<snipped for emphasis>. :maddening:

IMO- absolutely. As I have posted before, to me the 31 days IS the smoking gun. Not sure how they reconciled the 31 days in their minds at all. But if they had found anyway to get to a guilty on aggravted child abuse, it would have been a whole new ballgame with new verdicts all around.

But remember, the state did not argue negligence at all. They argued premeditated murder, so from what evidence would the jury have drawn the negligence? KWIM? The state did not contend that she was just negligent, nor did the defense, so if the jury did come up with that on their own it would have been kind of weird-not as weird as not guilty-but still weird.

 

[LinasK]

You know what I would like to see....I would like a poll that shows a demographic of NG people vs. Guilty people.
Liberal?
Conservative?
Middle of the road?
I think it would show alot.

Not necessarily... I am another who is proud to call myself a Liberal, and I would have no hesitation to have voted the Death Penalty for Casey!

 

[JBean]

Not necessarily... I am another who is proud to call myself a Liberal, and I would have no hesitation to have voted the Death Penalty for Casey!

Leaning Conservative here..no DP..ever
Shocking surprise that you and I would be polar opposites Linas- LMAO!

 

[LinasK]

I didn't follow it but wasn't there evidence in that trial that basically put him at the scene?

Absolutely, he claimed he was fishing in the same area where the body washed up!!!

But poor man had a perfectly reasonable explanation for why he was there-he was just sturgeon fishing. That doesn't mean he killed anyone and dropped their body over there!

Assume you're being facetious. Sturgeon fishing with the wrong type of bait!!!

 

[stilettos]

You know what I would like to see....I would like a poll that shows a demographic of NG people vs. Guilty people.
Liberal?
Conservative?
Middle of the road?
I think it would show alot.

Notso sure that political orientation has anything to do with it...Ignorance, laziness, lack of desire to interpret scientific and circumstantial evidence and moral turpitude IMO is more the blame. Liberals, Republicans and others can see the forest for the trees if they so choose...I will never for the life of me figure out how they found these twelve.:maddening:

 

[Nova24]

I know she will prob have another baby within a year. I fear for that baby. I pray she doesn't get jealous of this one too and kill it and toss it in a dump.

 

[Nova24]

The more the jury talks the clearer it becomes how little they understood of their role, punishment, RD, etc. They didn't understand more than they understood. JP was clear and they had written instructions. It was just a sloppy deliberation by people too confused and too lazy to get clarification. Of course #3 couldn't even be bothered to deliberate. That's comforting.

 

[Duckley]

You know what I would like to see....I would like a poll that shows a demographic of NG people vs. Guilty people.
Liberal?
Conservative?
Middle of the road?
I think it would show alot.

Interesting - what do you think the outcome would be. I am very liberal - however, I firmly believe that she is guilty and that there was more than enough evidence to substantiate this.

I do not agree with he DP so would have given her Life without the possibility of parole ....

 

[theBritster]

I know she will prob have another baby within a year. I fear for that baby. I pray she doesn't get jealous of this one too and kill it and toss it in a dump.

I, too, think she'll get pregnant sooner rather than later. Probably when the attention dies way down. It'll be the perfect way for her to say "Look at me! I'm pregnant! Everyone be pissed!" because for her, any attention is good attention. I fear for her future kids, too.

 

[Yellow Rose]

Have ya'll ever wondered why more of the jurors haven't spoken out? Do you think they finally realize what WRONG they have done by allowing this woman to walk free? Do you think they understand NOW what reasonable doubt is?

 

[1tasha]

Interesting - what do you think the outcome would be. I am very liberal - however, I firmly believe that she is guilty and that there was more than enough evidence to substantiate this.

I do not agree with he DP so would have given her Life without the possibility of parole ....

The same over here.

 

[katydid23]

I, too, think she'll get pregnant sooner rather than later. Probably when the attention dies way down. It'll be the perfect way for her to say "Look at me! I'm pregnant! Everyone be pissed!" because for her, any attention is good attention. I fear for her future kids, too.

I agree. It is the PERFECT way for her to torture her parents forever. She will taunt them, knowing they will never know or get the chance to love their new grandchild. Spite. That is what she is made of. Spitefulness.

 

[katydid23]

Have ya'll ever wondered why more of the jurors haven't spoken out? Do you think they finally realize what WRONG they have done by allowing this woman to walk free? Do you think they understand NOW what reasonable doubt is?

Nope, they are just trying to negotiate for a higher price.

 

[manatee]

These jurors had enough of sequestration. They wanted to go home and not take time reviewing the evidence and decided that might as well acquit her instead of reviewing the evidence. just lazyness in MOO

 

[Boytwnmom]

and all the evidence is inconsistent with an accident but consistent with a homicide. It is not reasonable to accept an unsupported tale refuted by the evidence. Every single piece of evidence is consistent with Casey Anthony being responsible for the death of her daughter. It may be reasonable to differ on the intent aspect and thus waver on the degree of culpability. But it is not reasonable, when every bit of evidence points to only one person, to decide that some other scenario may have happened and go with that. Any crazy story some defense attorney comes up with without any evidence to support it is not reasonable doubt otherwise Scott Peterson would be free because the jury heard his wife and son were killed in a Satanic ritual. I didn't follow that trial so they may have at least attempted to introduce evidence showing that.

The more I hear, the more I think this jury, led by misinformed but vocal and falsely confident jurors and the foreman, made everyone believe that they couldn't convict her of anything because the state didn't show to their satisfaction the things they weren't required to show at all like how and where she died and motive (although I think they established motive quite well). I sense these people were so confident they would not ask questions of the judge nor review their instructions-they knew they couldn't convict her and they were sure they were right and would convince the others that it was impossible and they should just agree so they could all go home.

Let me take it from a different point of view. You know nothing about this case. You hear the OS's. At that point you have the DT or SA version of events. The DT has the advantage they don't have to prove anything about their version of events. The key part of the DT's theory is GA.

Now fast foward a bit. The SA presents their case but there is no 'smoking gun' (in the eyes of the jury). You (the jury) think Casey had knowledge of her daughters death but ignored/refused to believe/etc. But did she kill her? Well, you have those computer searches. Did she do them? Did the state prove Casey was at home during that time in March (via cell phone records?). Now, you go through all that and then you refer back to the DT's version of events. Did GA know about the death of his granddaughter in June? Did you believe him when he said no? I don't think the jury did.

So, if the jury doesn't believe GA, and even to this day nobody here can say for 100% certain what actually happened to Caylee Anthony, how do you convict Casey Anthony of 1st degree murder? She's guilty of a ton of stuff, but how do we know it wasn't an accident? Remember, the DT didn't have to prove it was an accident, just bring doubt into the equation.

Before everyone jumps on my post, I do not believe she died via an accident, I believe she killed her daughter, but I wasn't on the jury either. I was also subject to more info than the jury was.

 

[Boytwnmom]

when or how the murder occurred. The bodies turned up near where he fished. Kind of like the body turning up in the woods next to Casey's house, only less connected. There was actually less evidence in the SP case from what I have read. The difference being the jurors were able to connect the dots in the only way that made sense. The SP jurors didn't go on about how lots of people fish in SF Bay and maybe some satanic worshippers who fish there killed her because they like to hold their black masses on water so they can fish at the same time ...

I didn't follow it but wasn't there evidence in that trial that basically put him at the scene?

 

[Boston]

Just incase you guys don't know the Jury Foreman is going to be giving an Interview Tonight @ 10pm on Greta Van S.