GUILTY FL - Murder Plot Gone Wrong, Dalia Dippolito Captured in YouTube Video

[MsJosie]

Reports from Trial Diaries and other sources....sorry cannot post on iPad, say DD will vontinue under house arrest and will be retried! There is an interview with ex too.

Report said the defense was nice to jury and said good morning while state was rude and would not acknowledge the jury. That is why defense 'won'....

I hope in next trial they put ex on stand....in next trial sanction attorneys do not threaten...in next trial dig deeper to find out if the baby was planned to keep DD out of jail.....just who is the dad (I know legally this may not beable to be done....but IMO it was planned, I have many question son this)...can DD have anyone visit her...no matter who it is? Who is paying DD attorneys, just wondering.....

And maybe serious trials should not happen around the holidays, I think it affects jurors to decide quickly or get a hung jury. I can see now why people think their should be professional jurors. Does any other country have professional jurors?

 

[jkly]

Reports from Trial Diaries and other sources....sorry cannot post on iPad, say DD will vontinue under house arrest and will be retried! There is an interview with ex too.

Report said the defense was nice to jury and said good morning while state was rude and would not acknowledge the jury. That is why defense 'won'....

I hope in next trial they put ex on stand....in next trial sanction attorneys do not threaten...in next trial dig deeper to find out if the baby was planned to keep DD out of jail.....just who is the dad (I know legally this may not beable to be done....but IMO it was planned, I have many question son this)...can DD have anyone visit her...no matter who it is? Who is paying DD attorneys, just wondering.....

And maybe serious trials should not happen around the holidays, I think it affects jurors to decide quickly or get a hung jury. I can see now why people think their should be professional jurors. Does any other country have professional jurors?

Hearing stuff like that really infuriates me. Do these juries think they're there to play around? Do they think this is a butt kissing contest? Do they think they were awarded their own personal thrones in the jury box and they're there to hand out favors to whichever side they personally feel sucked up to them more? How selfish can you be?

I can honestly say that the stupidity of these jurors exceeded worst expectations and I started watching this with some misgivings. But to blatantly ignore VIDEO evidence the way that they did and hang their decision on a couple of unsupported comments made by a defense attorney and the fact that they think they have some sort of magical body language reading skills...There are no words.

Aside from the Anthony trial, I have never been so disgusted with a juror's post trial commentary in my life.

I don't even blame the other three for giving up on convincing these people of Dalia's guilt. I couldn't spend more than a couple of hours deliberating with people this ridiculous without completely losing my temper.

Thank God they dug in their heels and gave the State another shot. That's all I can say.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

The lack of testimony by Mike D., her ex made this trial as sterile as can be. The jurors had no clue as to Dalia's character.

IMHO, Mike is a good-bad boy while Dalia is a bad-bad girl. In spite of his criminal activities, he came across as a love-struck puppy who handed her all his money and property. She told him she was having his baby. She told him she'd help him get off probation so they could travel! Meanwhile, she carried on with her boyfriend/collusion partner who couldn't take the heat and ratted on her.

He made the case for the prosecution first-time-round.

 

[steelman]

Complete idiots..................same peer group that let Casey Anthony walk. This is what happens when the jury pool is made up of people that don't watch the news, stay informed, or have any clue what's going on around them. Clueless.

 

[LietKynes]

What a circus !
But not mine...and not my monkeys either.

Watched the Dateline episode on this and think this woman needs to go away for a very long time. She is gross, disgusting, and utterly evil.
:moo:

 

[Hatfield]

I am so disgusted. I hope they do try her again. unfortunately, I don 't think the COPS show being involved was a very good thing. I suspect it had something to do with the jury opinions.

I agree on both counts.

I also want DA to try to prosecute her again. If it had been a real hitman then he would be dead. She is guilty IMO.

I also think the COPS show "thing" had a lot to do with the jury deadlock.
I have been very critical of that show long before now and I still think it is wrong on so many levels.

LE should not be exploiting suspects for entertainment purposes and for money. On shows like Cops, when I see officers running after, tackling, and roughing up a suspect and the guy gets up bleeding, and then officers high fiving each other afterwards I find myself rooting and cheering for the suspect to get away. It makes me sick to watch it and it is wrong on so many levels.

I have no problem with true crime documentaries and to explain the truth of what went down so the public can learn what evil is out there. But I have a huge problem with shows like Cops which is a totally different ballgame.

I suspect the jury in this case probably shared some of my feelings about this.

 

[YESorNO]

I noticed that too. There's always one special snowflake who has to hang the jury.

BBM...:silly:

:snowflake:

ETA: 3 snowflakes

:snowflake::snowflake:

Unbelievable...:gaah:

 

[Snoods]

This is a joke, right? I've said before, sometimes juries are so dense they need an actual video of the crime before they will convict. But in this case there actually IS a video and they STILL won't convict? I'm floored. This case was the slam-dunkiest of slam-dunks.

Regardless of COPS, she was on VIDEO begging for her husband to be killed. Paying money for a gun!

I didn't watch any of the trial. For those that did, did the prosecution think they had it in the bag and phoned in a half *advertiser censored* case that left room for doubt? Did the defense dazzle with semi-believable bull*****?

I don't understand why Mike D. wasn't subpoenaed to testify; last trial he was the crux of the case and an endearing and believable witness. The jury should have heard from the person at the center of this whole fiasco.

But regardless, THE VIDEO!

 

[jkly]

This is a joke, right? I've said before, sometimes juries are so dense they need an actual video of the crime before they will convict. But in this case there actually IS a video and they STILL won't convict? I'm floored. This case was the slam-dunkiest of slam-dunks.

Regardless of COPS, she was on VIDEO begging for her husband to be killed. Paying money for a gun!

I didn't watch any of the trial. For those that did, did the prosecution think they had it in the bag and phoned in a half *advertiser censored* case that left room for doubt? Did the defense dazzle with semi-believable bull*****?

I don't understand why Mike D. wasn't subpoenaed to testify; last trial he was the crux of the case and an endearing and believable witness. The jury should have heard from the person at the center of this whole fiasco.

But regardless, THE VIDEO!

I don't feel that the defense dazzled, however the prosecution could have done a lot better. The prosecutor was lazy and acted like he didn't really care.

That aside, as you pointed out, the jury had the evidence to convict right in front of their noses and Dalia's own behavior was proof of her intent. That video leaves little room for doubt unless you're willing to believe that the entire Boynton Beach Police department was trying to set this woman up.

There were three really stupid people on that jury and at least one really stupid alternate.

 

[jkly]

This is a joke, right? I've said before, sometimes juries are so dense they need an actual video of the crime before they will convict. But in this case there actually IS a video and they STILL won't convict? I'm floored. This case was the slam-dunkiest of slam-dunks.

Regardless of COPS, she was on VIDEO begging for her husband to be killed. Paying money for a gun!

I didn't watch any of the trial. For those that did, did the prosecution think they had it in the bag and phoned in a half *advertiser censored* case that left room for doubt? Did the defense dazzle with semi-believable bull*****?

I don't understand why Mike D. wasn't subpoenaed to testify; last trial he was the crux of the case and an endearing and believable witness. The jury should have heard from the person at the center of this whole fiasco.

But regardless, THE VIDEO!

I don't feel that the defense dazzled, however the prosecution certainly didn't either. The prosecutor was lazy and acted like he didn't really care. At one point, he appeared to be sleeping.

That aside, as you pointed out, the jury had the evidence to convict right in front of their noses and Dalia's own behavior was proof of her intent. That video leaves little room for doubt unless you're willing to believe that the entire Boynton Beach Police department was trying to set this woman up.

There were three really stupid people on that jury and at least one really stupid alternate.

 

[Barbie619]

I followed this case when it first happened and I was 100% sure she was guilty. After her conviction I moved on, not knowing her conviction had been overturned and all the ensuing drama since.

With this mistrial, I have some questions about her guilt. Maybe it's memory loss on my part or maybe it's due to this trial not having a complete case due to certain individuals not taking the stand but.... I've realized that video's, all of them were just clips and not the full video of what happened before and after. It's as if the killing portion was shown but not what was said before and after and does that matter? To me it really does.... She didn't just jump in and out of vehicles, speak of doing the hit and that's all that was said, there's more information that went on during those video's that were never shown and that seems important to me.

Another question I have is related to the COPS show. When exactly did this potential crime begin related to this show? Did MS the CI go to the police? How much before the video's were starting to record? How much time elapsed between CI going to police with this story of murder and COPS show involvement?

Did BBPD contact COPS about this possible hit going down or where they already filming for the show when this story began? How did COPS show become involved? Then there's the question of when BBPD informed her of her husbands death, how did they get her to sign a release form to be on COPS when she came upon the staged scene? What was going on that wasn't filmed for that show? Were any of these questions brought up during trial or have they been answered in anyway at any time over the past 7 years?

I can't stand DD and think she's a horrible person but it gives me pause to convict her based solely on the video's. Believe me I thought the 1st jury had it right BUT now I wonder. I believe she wanted her husband murdered, that isn't in doubt for me but how much was COPS involvement influenced to the BBPD to catch this woman? It's really ashame that the jury in this case might have the same doubts that I'm feeling now because the prosecutors didn't prove that things happened the way they happened....

 

[katydid23]

"I can't stand DD and think she's a horrible person but it gives me pause to convict her based solely on the video's. Believe me I thought the 1st jury had it right BUT now I wonder. I believe she wanted her husband murdered, that isn't in doubt for me but how much was COPS involvement influenced to the BBPD to catch this woman? It's really ashame that the jury in this case might have the same doubts that I'm feeling now because the prosecutors didn't prove that things happened the way they happened...."


But if she wanted her husband to be murdered, and she asked someone, that she believed was a hitman, to murder him, What Difference Does It Make if the COPS show was filming it or not?

I don't understand how that changes the crime. She wanted her husband dead. End of Story. Why does it matter if some of the officers wanted to be on the show?

 

[jkly]

I followed this case when it first happened and I was 100% sure she was guilty. After her conviction I moved on, not knowing her conviction had been overturned and all the ensuing drama since.

With this mistrial, I have some questions about her guilt. Maybe it's memory loss on my part or maybe it's due to this trial not having a complete case due to certain individuals not taking the stand but.... I've realized that video's, all of them were just clips and not the full video of what happened before and after. It's as if the killing portion was shown but not what was said before and after and does that matter? To me it really does.... She didn't just jump in and out of vehicles, speak of doing the hit and that's all that was said, there's more information that went on during those video's that were never shown and that seems important to me.

Another question I have is related to the COPS show. When exactly did this potential crime begin related to this show? Did MS the CI go to the police? How much before the video's were starting to record? How much time elapsed between CI going to police with this story of murder and COPS show involvement?

Did BBPD contact COPS about this possible hit going down or where they already filming for the show when this story began? How did COPS show become involved? Then there's the question of when BBPD informed her of her husbands death, how did they get her to sign a release form to be on COPS when she came upon the staged scene? What was going on that wasn't filmed for that show? Were any of these questions brought up during trial or have they been answered in anyway at any time over the past 7 years?

I can't stand DD and think she's a horrible person but it gives me pause to convict her based solely on the video's. Believe me I thought the 1st jury had it right BUT now I wonder. I believe she wanted her husband murdered, that isn't in doubt for me but how much was COPS involvement influenced to the BBPD to catch this woman? It's really ashame that the jury in this case might have the same doubts that I'm feeling now because the prosecutors didn't prove that things happened the way they happened....

You seem to be forgetting the fact that she:

1) Stole money and tried to steal the title of the house from her husband.
2) Set him up multiple times by planting drugs in his car and calling the police.
3) Put anti-freeze in one of his drinks and told Shihadeh about it.
4) Cheated on her husband, talked about how she couldn't stand him. Talked about trying to get him sent back to jail by putting him in a situation that would cause him to violate his parole.
5) Approached people other than the undercover officer to have her husband killed. One of her deals fell through and IIRC, she lost some money.
6) And she was married once before and took her first husband for pretty much everything he had.

 

[U2forever]

This is a joke, right? I've said before, sometimes juries are so dense they need an actual video of the crime before they will convict. But in this case there actually IS a video and they STILL won't convict? I'm floored. This case was the slam-dunkiest of slam-dunks.

Regardless of COPS, she was on VIDEO begging for her husband to be killed. Paying money for a gun!

I didn't watch any of the trial. For those that did, did the prosecution think they had it in the bag and phoned in a half *advertiser censored* case that left room for doubt? Did the defense dazzle with semi-believable bull*****?

I don't understand why Mike D. wasn't subpoenaed to testify; last trial he was the crux of the case and an endearing and believable witness. The jury should have heard from the person at the center of this whole fiasco.

But regardless, THE VIDEO!

It's Florida, people. Only in Florida. LOL :crazy:

 

[Snoods]

I followed this case when it first happened and I was 100% sure she was guilty. After her conviction I moved on, not knowing her conviction had been overturned and all the ensuing drama since.

With this mistrial, I have some questions about her guilt. Maybe it's memory loss on my part or maybe it's due to this trial not having a complete case due to certain individuals not taking the stand but.... I've realized that video's, all of them were just clips and not the full video of what happened before and after. It's as if the killing portion was shown but not what was said before and after and does that matter? To me it really does.... She didn't just jump in and out of vehicles, speak of doing the hit and that's all that was said, there's more information that went on during those video's that were never shown and that seems important to me.

Another question I have is related to the COPS show. When exactly did this potential crime begin related to this show? Did MS the CI go to the police? How much before the video's were starting to record? How much time elapsed between CI going to police with this story of murder and COPS show involvement?

Did BBPD contact COPS about this possible hit going down or where they already filming for the show when this story began? How did COPS show become involved? Then there's the question of when BBPD informed her of her husbands death, how did they get her to sign a release form to be on COPS when she came upon the staged scene? What was going on that wasn't filmed for that show? Were any of these questions brought up during trial or have they been answered in anyway at any time over the past 7 years?

I can't stand DD and think she's a horrible person but it gives me pause to convict her based solely on the video's. Believe me I thought the 1st jury had it right BUT now I wonder. I believe she wanted her husband murdered, that isn't in doubt for me but how much was COPS involvement influenced to the BBPD to catch this woman? It's really ashame that the jury in this case might have the same doubts that I'm feeling now because the prosecutors didn't prove that things happened the way they happened....

BBM If you believe without a doubt she wanted her husband murdered, why does the fact that it was filmed on COPS somehow negate the actual crime? I think the cops involved would have arrested DD with or without the show COPS being involved. I doubt they would have let her continue on all skipping to her lou with her murder plot and only arrest her if it was going to be filmed for COPS.

 

[Kapua]

This is a joke, right? I've said before, sometimes juries are so dense they need an actual video of the crime before they will convict. But in this case there actually IS a video and they STILL won't convict? I'm floored. This case was the slam-dunkiest of slam-dunks.

Regardless of COPS, she was on VIDEO begging for her husband to be killed. Paying money for a gun!

I didn't watch any of the trial. For those that did, did the prosecution think they had it in the bag and phoned in a half *advertiser censored* case that left room for doubt? Did the defense dazzle with semi-believable bull*****?

I don't understand why Mike D. wasn't subpoenaed to testify; last trial he was the crux of the case and an endearing and believable witness. The jury should have heard from the person at the center of this whole fiasco.

But regardless, THE VIDEO!

Exactly! Where did they find 3 people who don't believe their own eyes and ears? I haven't been following this case, but I caught the Dateline episode recently. This evil psychopath belongs behind bars for the rest of her miserable life. jail: I'm disgusted that she's been out on house arrest and has had a son during that time.

I have to say, her ex-husband took the verdict remarkably well. I guess he feels lucky to be alive.

:cow:

 

[Barbie619]

"I can't stand DD and think she's a horrible person but it gives me pause to convict her based solely on the video's. Believe me I thought the 1st jury had it right BUT now I wonder. I believe she wanted her husband murdered, that isn't in doubt for me but how much was COPS involvement influenced to the BBPD to catch this woman? It's really ashame that the jury in this case might have the same doubts that I'm feeling now because the prosecutors didn't prove that things happened the way they happened...."


But if she wanted her husband to be murdered, and she asked someone, that she believed was a hitman, to murder him, What Difference Does It Make if the COPS show was filming it or not?

I don't understand how that changes the crime. She wanted her husband dead. End of Story. Why does it matter if some of the officers wanted to be on the show?

I.

I feel like it contaminates the crime. All the video's, who created them? BBPD or COPS?? I would be 100% convinced had that show not been involved!

 

[Barbie619]

You seem to be forgetting the fact that she:

1) Stole money and tried to steal the title of the house from her husband.
2) Set him up multiple times by planting drugs in his car and calling the police.
3) Put anti-freeze in one of his drinks and told Shihadeh about it.
4) Cheated on her husband, talked about how she couldn't stand him. Talked about trying to get him sent back to jail by putting him in a situation that would cause him to violate his parole.
5) Approached people other than the undercover officer to have her husband killed. One of her deals fell through and IIRC, she lost some money.
6) And she was married once before and took her first husband for pretty much everything he had.

I know of most of these schemes she was doing but in my mind how was this investigated by BBPD? That's why I asked questions, BBPD got COPS the show involved when in their investigation and how did that influence all these video's???

 

[LinasK]

I.

I feel like it contaminates the crime. All the video's, who created them? BBPD or COPS?? I would be 100% convinced had that show not been involved!

How exactly does it contaminate the crime?? Were the officers involved paid to put on an acting job? Dahlia sure wasn't! Cops are allowed to entrap people all the time- the show just happened to be there at the right time to film it. David Muir of 20/20 did a segment showing undercover cops doing stings of hits on people that wanted to pay for hitmen. It's attempted murder. Noone complained when those people got caught and convicted. Was it because it was 20/20 and not COPS???
If the hitman hadn't been fake, her husband Michael would have been dead. She wanted it done "5,000%". That was no script!

 

[Snoods]

The show had nothing to do with her guilt or innocence. So her friend who turned her in to the police, along with the entire police department, decided to risk their careers and conspired together to frame poor innocent Dalia just to be on COPS? What about her OWN WORDS on VIDEO? What does it take to convict someone these days?

So does this mean any criminal who has been filmed on the show COPS should now be subject for a retrial, because the police involved were probably just arresting innocent people so they could be on television?

She even tried to poison him with anti-freeze, along with planting drugs in his car in an attempt to get his parole revoked. Plus tried to steal his house from him. Yeah, she's just a victim.