Dr. G, also said she could have drowned. HER conclusion was murder, but
not 100% proven. The drowning theory proved reasonable doubt and Her saying 100% percent of drowning accidents reported was evidence would not prove that the child didn't drown. You shouldn't convict on statistics, by law.
Here we go again.... You realize that no one is saying she should be convicted on JUST what Dr. G said. It is only one piece of the evidence, and I think supports what all the other evidence supports. Again, when people say "oh but you cant convict on this", it is not a fair argument, it's a strawman, because no one is saying to convict on just one of the many pieces of evidence, we are saying convict based on ALL of it.
The tape didn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Mr. Ashton said his theory from the beginning was the tape. They focused on this tape but they should have somehow connected it to Casey. Just coming from the home didn't do it.
Each piece is not supposed to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. The totality is. It is connected to Casey because the only other two people who had access to it, the rest of the evidence excludes them as suspects. I wish people would stop trying to judge the evidence in isolation, it doesnt work that way and it isn;t supposed to work that way.
The chloroform wasn't proven, there was not enough of it in the car, or anywhere. You can't rule out that is may have come from household cleaning products. That was testified to.
It was proven, there was enough in the car to prove that there had been a good amount there, since it is a volatile substance that would have evaporated. Also, a reasonable person would rule out household products because if a household product had been used, the defense would have presented it. You really think they wouldnt show the jury "Hey this is what she used, here are the ingredients that caused chloroform to appear, etc". You can tell me they don't "have" to present anything, but the fact that the chloroform and the searches are so incriminating would cause any good defense lawyer to prove that is not what happened. Except he couldnt in this case, because it wasnt from cleaning products. Again, you dont have to prove EACH piece of evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.
There is just so much reasonable doubt. There is so much more on TV for 3 years we listened to and we were pretty much brain washed to guilt. I have to respect the jury's decision because they were limited to the evidence and testimony in the court room only. Like it or not the Jury spoke. We may not like it but we should respect it. It's reality now and you can argue, state you case but if you would be fair and think about it I don't see how you can't see the reasonable doubt that was created.
You are right that we heard and saw a lot of casey;s behavior in court and on bond that reinforced our belief in her guilt, but the actual evidence presented still was more than enough to convict, and other trials are proof of that. I don't expect the verdict to change or Casey to be charged, we know that wont happen. But I dont think we should just stay quiet and not voice concerns when the justice system fails us. It;s OUR system, we have a right to decide if its meeting our needs or not. I don't see any reasonable doubt, Ive tried, but I dont see it. There is no reasonable explanation that explains ALL the evidence except for murder. All the evidence as a whole. All the guilty aspects arent coincidences, they are there for a reason.
For me, GA created reasonable doubt for this jury, and for me. Right off the bat early on, I could get past him not calling 911 when he went to pick up the smelling car from the tow yard. I can't even imagine my child being gone and I haven't seen her, not to mention a grandchild, and the smell of death is in the vehicle and I don't call 911. I can't get over that, no excuse what so ever.
Ive said it before, I think George should have called 911` but remember, Cindy had been talking to casey every day, and casey was telling caylee was fine. Do you think he really imagined at that time that caylee could be dead and casey would say otherwise?? can you see how the fact that he was told that both caylee and casey were ok (by casey herself) could cause him to be in denial? Not to mention, he had called the police before over the gas cans, only to find out casey stole them. I could see him being reluctant to call the police again before knowing for sure there was a reason to. Also, they found the car and called 911 THE SAME DAY. Maybe not 5 minutes later, but the same day. Casey on the other hand never called 911, ever, even after 31 days. George and Cindy found the car and called the very same day!
Also, rarely in cases do we get to hear the suspects (if you consider George a suspect) talking to each other on tape or on video. Here we got to see George and casey having long conversations where it is clear that George wanted Casey to tell the cops everything she knew, and that he was trying to get info from her. It is unreasonable to think that they were BOTH acting.