Does Anyone here think Casey Anthony is innocent?

[Clock's Tickin]

Even if KC's DNA is all over disposal, it does not mean that she murdered Caylee, just that she disposed of her. KC behaves in her "way" because she is defective. Proving her guilty of murder may be a challenge for the prosecution, not impossible, but a challenge. I expect the defense to stick with the "Nanny" theory, though I don't know how....

My best guess (as I've mentioned in other threads) is that KC played the role of Zanny on the days she was "stuck" babysitting her daughter.....

 

[Forensic fan]

I realize most of you have been here longer than me. But is there anyone out there who believe she may be innocent??

No way, Jose'

 

[Shaymus at The Rock]

Looks to me, that there are people out there, who can make a case for doubt. I don't know if it is reasonable doubt, but doubt. So with that said, I hope to God there is a print or KC's hair stuck to that duct tape.

Oh, I hadn't thought about hair. I was pinning my hopes on fingerprints. Thanks, you lifted my hopes a little.

 

[CentralFLMama]

When it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck and walks like a duck, it's a duck, not a dog in costume

Thank you. I have heard scenarios painted that bend and contort and twist the facts to make it work. Keep it simple because it usually is.


Guilty as sin, IMO

 

[BetsyB]

The defense does have to put on a case. Why is everyone so sure they don't have anything? Just because it has not been leaked to the press yet?

Actually, no--the defense does NOT have to put on a case. The burden is 100% on the prosecution.

The evidence we've seen is not the result of leaks. It has been released to the public pursuant to Florida's Sunshine Act. As a result, we've seen a great deal of bona fide evidence--not speculation, not media spin.

It's been very, very damning.

 

[chaingangal]

No way, shape or form is this girl innocent. We may not know the exact circumstances but she knows exactly what happened to Caylee.:banghead:

 

[sweetmop]

When it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, swims like a duck and walks like a duck, it's a duck, not a dog in costume. While it is always good to look outside the box, facts can be beyond dispute.

My life experience tells me a "mother" wouldn't be arm in arm with her new squeeze before her baby's body had had time to cool off IF the death was a surprise.

I also cannot rationalize putting duct tape over my baby's face. Or happily chattering away to people about my baby being at park/beach having such a GOOD time after I'd taped over my baby's face...

JMO

:clap: Amen!

 

[Knot4u2no]

I realize most of you have been here longer than me. But is there anyone out there who believe she may be innocent??

Innocent? She is definitely guilty of lying and intentionally misleading LE. Is she guilty of first degree/premeditated murder? I don’t know. Does she know what happened to Caylee? I think so. Did she act alone in causing Caylee’s death? I don’t think so. Do others involved know what happened to Caylee? I think so. Do others involved know why Casey continues to conceal the truth? I think so. Have others involved intentionally manipulated evidence? I think so. Do I have a theory about why this case has progressed the way it has? Yes, but I wouldn’t post it in a public forum. Do I think my theory about this case is accurate? I wouldn’t bet on it ... too many assumptions.

Russell

 

[TxLady2]

Actually, no--the defense does NOT have to put on a case. The burden is 100% on the prosecution.

The evidence we've seen is not the result of leaks. It has been released to the public pursuant to Florida's Sunshine Act. As a result, we've seen a great deal of bona fide evidence--not speculation, not media spin.

It's been very, very damning.

Technically, you are right. The defense could simply not call any witnesses and rely on their opening and closing arguments and at the end say, "the defense rests." But that would only make the prosecution's case stronger. I am sure that the defense team intends to "put on a case," which will consist of trying to discount all the evidence, and blow holes in all the witnesses for the prosecution's testimony, and/or attempt to prove that Casey did not commit this crime, or was mentally ill at the time, or something along those lines. All of which, in my estimation, will be futile, because once they see and hear the evidence, no juror in their right mind will have ANY doubt that she is guilty. I don't know of any high-profile cases in which the defense lawyers did not present their case, nor called in witnesses for their side. Could be some, but I assume that has happened when the prosecution had not much evidence or a very weak case, and that is not the case here.
That said, I want there to be absolutely irrefutable evidence that she did it, not just that she lied and stole money and did not report her child missing for a month, or any of that computer stuff. I mean, actual fingerprint, DNA evidence that she murdered her child and threw her away like garbage. I am counting on them to have that evidence.

 

[Amil]

Innocent? She is definitely guilty of lying and intentionally misleading LE. Is she guilty of first degree/premeditated murder? I don’t know. Does she know what happened to Caylee? I think so. Did she act alone in causing Caylee’s death? I don’t think so. Do others involved know what happened to Caylee? I think so. Do others involved know why Casey continues to conceal the truth? I think so. Have others involved intentionally manipulated evidence? I think so. Do I have a theory about why this case has progressed the way it has? Yes, but I wouldn’t post it in a public forum. Do I think my theory about this case is accurate? I wouldn’t bet on it ... too many assumptions.

Russell

Aww, please??

 

[Foxxtrot]

Do you expect her lawyer to say she's guilty? Him saying she's innocent means nothing.

No I do not. I actually expect him not to say anything at all, but since he has he has me very curious.

I can understand him saying his client will have her day in court but to come out and say with such an emphatic tone that she is innocent baffles me.

 

[Foxxtrot]

I can't speak for all mothers, but I'd bet most of us would have died right there with our child if someone else had done it. I know they'd have to kill me too because I'd be coming at them like a friggin train.

Me too. Especially if it were my only child.

 

[Skully]

Innocent? She is definitely guilty of lying and intentionally misleading LE. Is she guilty of first degree/premeditated murder? I don’t know. Does she know what happened to Caylee? I think so. Did she act alone in causing Caylee’s death? I don’t think so. Do others involved know what happened to Caylee? I think so. Do others involved know why Casey continues to conceal the truth? I think so. Have others involved intentionally manipulated evidence? I think so. Do I have a theory about why this case has progressed the way it has? Yes, but I wouldn’t post it in a public forum. Do I think my theory about this case is accurate? I wouldn’t bet on it ... too many assumptions.

Russell

I would love to compare theories with you, but I don't want to do any favors for JB and his dream team.....LOL

 

[Foxxtrot]

I have read the whole thread; in the past hour. Scott Peterson's attorney said it, OJ's team said it; JB is saying it. I know ONE story that would answer all of it, except one thing. That thing is how she was able to get up out of bed and party after after this happened. When my dog died, I cried for 6 months and only stopped because we got a new puppy to distract me.

Could you tell me the ONE story?

There are lots of things that don't make sense or don't add up in this case, but in my mind the most important one is her actions after she knew Caylee was dead.

There was a lot of things that didn't make sense in the Cynthia Sommer's trial also, but she was still found guilty. Mostly because of her actions after her husband died. So I don't think we can always go on the persons actions.

I think it is horrible she was able to go out and do that. The big question is WHY she did it.

 

[ShawnHS]

I am saying that there appears to be an abundance of evidence against her. I don't deny that. I think the defense has evidence that has not been brought to the public view yet. Baez keeps saying we don't know the whole story. I am saying I agree "we don't know the whole story". Ther's more to it, more people, accidental which scared who was involved for whatever reason, could have been blackmailed and after her arrest, blackmail went bad. Drugs, smuggling, stolen parts, travel to get rid of stuff, I'm thowing stuffout that you have already discussed. Gang retribution in Floirda is not nice. Promises of paying someone in some type of illegal activity that doesn't happen, you lose your life or someone else you love and then you're fearful to say anything. Maybe somebody killed her daughter in front of her, and she had to do what only a parent could do and take her baby home in the trunk of the car. Maybe the duct tape was put on the girl by whomever and not Casey. Maybe Casey was crushed and wrapped her in a special blanket with special thing and put the kiss on her lips forever from her mom. I don't know BUT these things happen in our country. Sick as it is, she maybe guilty of a crime but not necessarily 1st degree murder. I just don't know but I do know what happens when these young people get involved with "friends" and find themselves in preety serious life threating situations. I have 1st hand information on this.

I have done extensive Reverse Speech analysis (do an internet search to learn more about RS) on Casey and others in the case. I have found approximately 48 speech reversals on Casey alone. My conclusion is there is more going on in this case than is known. Based upon some of Casey's speech reversal's I don't think your "hallucinations" as to what could have happened are that far fetched.

Casey's reverse speech analysis indicates she is scared to her core, and has referenced more than once "boy" and "boys" being involved. I believe she may also have revealed a name. She even indicated in a reversal if given a chance she would have shown her parents where Caylee was. If she killed her daughter, why would she want to reveal Caylee's location to them?

Based upon her reverse speech analysis, I believe there is a scenario where reasonable doubt could be found, and that others are involved.

Web Site Links:
Websleuths: Backward State Site
Backward State: Casey Anthony
You Tube: Watch the videos - Casey Anthony: "I'm Not The Despot", Casey Anthony: "Boys Did This"

 

[JMCDAD]

Never reported her daugther missing - think about how many innocent people would do that
Lied about basically everything concerning what happened to her daughter - think about how many innocent people would do that
not only made up stories but made up people - how many innocent people would do that
didn't know the correct date her daughter went missing
went and rented videos the the day she says her daugther went missing
went partying during the time her daughter was missing
got a beautiful life tat during the time her daughter went missing
is more concerned about her situation than her missing daughter
add on top of all this all the forensic evidence they have
oh yeah, she guilty

 

[Foxxtrot]

We are not her defense lawyers.....we see the facts and go from there. There are NO facts supporting her innocence.

I know we aren't defense lawyers nor are we prosecutors either.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

No I do not. I actually expect him not to say anything at all, but since he has he has me very curious.

I can understand him saying his client will have her day in court but to come out and say with such an emphatic tone that she is innocent baffles me.

He used the same "emphatic tone" to try to convince people Caylee was still alive and he was going to bring her home, too. (This is AFTER Fake T. Black/GC stated on national television she was dead back in October. JB knew it wasn't true, imo, or someone that close to the defense team wouldn't have said it.)

It is what defense attorneys do every day. It is their job to mislead, lie, sway public opinion, or however you choose to characterize it.

 

[Foxxtrot]

It has been discussed since day 31.....everything points back to Casey. There are many many threads .....do some reading. You will see that all kinds of possibilities have been talked about.

Originally Posted by OneLostGrl View Post
As I have stated all along I am not 100 % positive that it was Casey that killed Caylee.

I thought my question was a fair one. If she is not 100% positive, then is there anyone else that she thinks might have done it?

I have done reading, thank you. I also know all kinds of possibility's have been talked about but that doesn't mean I can't ask a question.

 

[BetsyB]

I have done extensive Reverse Speech analysis (do an internet search to learn more about RS) on Casey and others in the case. I have found approximately 48 speech reversals on Casey alone. My conclusion is there is more going on in this case than is known. Based upon some of Casey's speech reversal's I don't think your "hallucinations" as to what could have happened are that far fetched.

Casey's reverse speech analysis indicates she is scared to her core, and has referenced more than once "boy" and "boys" being involved. I believe she may also have revealed a name. She even indicated in a reversal if given a chance she would have shown her parents where Caylee was. If she killed her daughter, why would she want to reveal Caylee's location to them?

Based upon her reverse speech analysis, I believe there is a scenario where reasonable doubt could be found, and that others are involved.

Web Site Links:
Websleuths: Backward State Site
Backward State: Casey Anthony
You Tube: Watch the videos - Casey Anthony: "I'm Not The Despot", Casey Anthony: "Boys Did This"

Has RS ever been used to exonerate a defendant? I would guess (and I may be wrong) that it's never been used, in and of itself, in a court of law, but rather to help the defense (or prosecution) formulate a theory.

I respect your work, and your belief in its veracity. But I haven't seen any authoritative evidence to support it.

But let's say she did reveal the site of the body. I'd conclude that she wanted someone in her dysfunctional, enmeshed family to MOVE it for her, better concealing her crime.