For those who agree with the verdict...help me understand.

[MissJames]

None whatsoever.

And that explains how we got the verdict.Make up something ,like video games that no one even brought up as any kind of evidence,and ignore the real circumstantial evidence.
I think that's exactly what this jury did,also,based the interviews with the foreman and #3.
Cheers !

 

[RANCH]

You should read this entired thread. Then you will see that those that agree with the verdict have tried to "help me understand" for those that do not and have constantly been insulted throughout. Not directing this at you, it's just a fact that alot of us that have posted our reasons have been pounced upon religiously to the point that the thread was not at all constructive. JMO

I haven't seen any constant insults.My advice to you if you feel your being insulted is to report the post.If this thread is no longer constructive, do you suggest it be locked?

 

[cluciano63]

I think it is possible to agree with the verdict without agreeing how the jury arrived at it. JMO
And also that by agreeing with the verdict does NOT have to mean that one believes that Casey is innocent.

 

[pcrum12]

Cindy was left alone with that car. The smell was coming from the trunk. If people want to believe she didn't try to clean that car when she had it alone, be my guest. The car was still aired out for hours, so that would affect chloroform levels. I have no doubts Caylee was in that trunk at one time. jmo

I agree that Caylee was in the trunk too. But I do not believe the chloroform. Whether CA cleaned the car that day or not, GA was a car guy, (I'm a car girl lol - worked in the auto dealership business for 30 yrs), trust me, that trunk was cleaned, dry cleaned, steam cleamed, you name it. So my question is, if chloroform evaporates quickly but the reason it was still there is that is was trapped in the plastic or whatever, wouldn't cleaning solution which does not evaporate quickly, be trapped as well and be the answer to the normal level of chloroform found in cleaning product?

 

[MarthaM]

And that explains how we got the verdict.Make up something ,like video games that no one even brought up as any kind of evidence,and ignore the real circumstantial evidence.
I think that's exactly what this jury did,also,based the interviews with the foreman and #3.
Cheers !

Huh? I didn't say anything about my very brief 'game' comment being evidence or anything that should be considered in deliberations or even anything of any great significance. All I said was that when I heard those search terms, that's what I thought of. I highly doubt that anybody else here honestly thinks that I was saying anything more than that.

You know, casual back-and-forth does happen on these threads. Not every word we say has to be something we think shoud have been sworn to under oath in a courtroom. Sometimes, we're just talking.

 

[EPfan]

So you don't believe the jury broke the rules? Even after what two of them have admitted to on tv?

I think that the prosecution used the duck tape, and the chloroform as being the murder weapon. You can't say chloroform was used and then not have evidence that the chloroform was made, they didn't have anything to show where the ingredients were purchased, Clorox, lot's of ice, and acetone(not the fingernail polish remover acetone, but real acetone). There wasn't any evidence to show that chloroform was made. There should have been a connection beside looking up "How to make chloroform". I never believed the 84 times either. Common since should tell someone that.
The duck tape was found by the skull in a mass of hair. The skull had been tampered with by the meter reader, so you don't know the exact position of the duck tape before he came along. There wasn't any DNA, nothing on the tape. One piece of tape was 8 to 10 feet from the skull, so the three pieces were actually two pieces. The witness for the defense got it right, he said that hair doesn't fall from the side but straight down. This showed the skull had been tampered with. He said he didn't know who had moved the skull but it had been moved. It just fit for me. This case in complicated but if you sat down everyday and watched you started having doubt.
I had such empathy for GA, but he had to get up on the stand and act defensive on the stand when the defense questioned him. He was perfect for the prosecution. I felt he lied about the affair because or going to CH house 12 times , and esp. the text, I need you in my life. He lied once so could have lied about something else. Didn't sound like a friendship I would approve of. I also still can't get over GA not calling 911 at the tow place when he said he smelled decomp. Casey's purse was in the front seat and he hadn't seen her and he didn't even try to call her and see what was going on. Then after he took the car home Cindy started spraying fa-breeze, and cleaning the doll, washing clothes, most likely cleaning to get the smell out. She didn't call 911 either. This is just strange to me. I would have immediately thought something was wrong right then and there. Again this raising questions.
I could go on and on. The main thing for me is I didn't think the prosecution proved their case. I do think Casey had something to do with this, but I don't know if it was an accident or intentionally. I can't rule out others being involved either. I also think that if Casey had planned to murder Caylee that she would have had it planned from a to z. I think she would have planned where she was going to dispose the remains. This point to an Accident that snowballed out of control for me. But, I don't know who was involved, it could have been only Casey but there is just little possibility that someone else knew.

 

[EPfan]

i think it is possible to agree with the verdict without agreeing how the jury arrived at it. Jmo
and also that by agreeing with the verdict does not have to mean that one believes that casey is innocent.

well said!!!!

 

[jrb0124]

I think that the prosecution used the duck tape, and the chloroform as being the murder weapon.

Yes, and the experts cancelled each other out on the chloroform: both with the air sample testing (more consistent with gasoline), and the carpet sample ("insignificant" levels according to FBI).

As for the duct tape, the OCME office stated in their report that it can be inferred (i.e. not "determined", not a fact, not the only possible conclusion) that the duct tape was over the mouth and nose pre-mortem.

Judge Perry also said that a reasonable inferencecould be made by the jury that Caylee drowned, and thus allowed the defense team to use the drowning accident theory in their closing.

The State had to prove both that a homicide occured and that Casey was the perp.

They proved neither.

The jury followed their instructions correctly.

 

[WillChgo]

I too, didn't really follow this case until the trial started... infact.. here in this forum there is a thread called we thr Jury... there was a poll.. I convicted her of one count of lying...now that I understnad (from the trial) why there was 4... I agree with that...

I have to say that Baez held my attention from his statement regarding Geroge "have her dad's penis in her mouth in the morning and had to go to school as if nothing happened" .. I was literally stunned... the language used in the court room.... Beaz, IMO used his play on emotion card there... guess I fell for it cause I listened to every single word after that...
I am guilty of enjoying theatrics in the court room, and Baez did a good job at that..
Jeff & Linda were on the ball, but very boring to listen to...

WOW. Thanks for your post. This perhaps more than anything else explains the jury's verdict.

Psychologist tell us that there are two ways that people make judgments and decisions.

1. Based on emotion, intuition, and heuristics.
2. Based on analysis

Your post is consistent with the jury foreman's interview. The jury spent little time in analysis and went with their gut, and their gut was all filtered by Baez's wild, theatrical opening statement, for which no evidence was available or presented.

Psychologists also have shown that heuristic reasoning is subject to the anchoring and insufficient adjustment bias. The jury anchored on Baez's statement about George, and even if they discounted for the lack of evidence of abuse, insufficiently discounted for this, and basically believed him less than they believed Casey, a proven liar.

 

[jrb0124]

Not every word we say has to be something we think shoud have been sworn to under oath in a courtroom. Sometimes, we're just talking.

Its almost as if those trying to explain how the jury reached a not-guilty verdict are being held out as jurors...we're not. We are not bound to the same rules of discussion and deliberation as they are.

I had posted earlier that the jury was turned off by JA's condescending attitude and facial antics. A resulting post said "AHA! so the jury was biased after all and didn't follow instructions!"

 

[kelian36]

well I happen to NOT believe the chloroform in the trunk theory. Lying, stealing, sleeping around doesn't equal murder. And yes, I believe she would sit in jail for 3 yrs under the circumstances. However, I really don't think she was this big time Party Loser the MEDIA painted her to be. All JMOO

So....a non-murdered toddler ended up with duct tapewrapped around her head 3 times.
Ended up stuffed into 3 trash bags.
Ended up IN A WHITE LAUNDRY BAG FROM THE HOUSE she lived in.
Ended up thrown away like tossed trash.....15 houses away from where she lived.......
but was not murdered?

I call bs.
karma is going to get FCA one day.

 

[kelian36]

So you could find someone guilty or not guilty because of how boring or entertaining an attny was? :0

Originally Posted by Wendy101 View Post
I too, didn't really follow this case until the trial started... infact.. here in this forum there is a thread called we thr Jury... there was a poll.. I convicted her of one count of lying...now that I understnad (from the trial) why there was 4... I agree with that...

I have to say that Baez held my attention from his statement regarding Geroge "have her dad's penis in her mouth in the morning and had to go to school as if nothing happened" .. I was literally stunned... the language used in the court room.... Beaz, IMO used his play on emotion card there... guess I fell for it cause I listened to every single word after that...
I am guilty of enjoying theatrics in the court room, and Baez did a good job at that..
Jeff & Linda were on the ball, but very boring to listen to...

 

[jrb0124]

The jury spent little time in analysis and went with their gut, and their gut was all filtered by Baez's wild, theatrical opening statement, for which no evidence was available or presented.

(hypothetical deliberations)

"raise your hand if the prosecution proved there was a homicide committed by Casey Anthony"

(2 raise their hands)

"okay, how are you convinced it was a homicide and not an accident beyond any reasonable doubt?"

--"the duct tape?"

"okay, how are you convinced beyond a reasonable doubt Casey was the one who did it"

--"ummm...who else would do it?"

"dunno, you're the one convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that Casey did it, tell us why?"

--"I dunno...what do you guys think?"

 

[kelian36]

I think it is possible to agree with the verdict without agreeing how the jury arrived at it. JMO
And also that by agreeing with the verdict does NOT have to mean that one believes that Casey is innocent.

To agree with the jurors verdict is to totally ignore everything the State showed and argued.

 

[kelian36]

(hypothetical deliberations)

"raise your hand if the prosecution proved there was a homicide committed by Casey Anthony"

(2 raise their hands)

"okay, how are you convinced it was a homicide and not an accident beyond any reasonable doubt?"

--"the duct tape?"

"okay, how are you convinced beyond a reasonable doubt Casey was the one who did it"

--"ummm...who else would do it?"

"dunno, you're the one convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that Casey did it, tell us why?"

--"I dunno...what do you guys think?"

Or how about, "Hey, I heard we're getting a free trip to Disney World and free baseball tickets. Let's wrap this up!":banghead:

 

[Littleone48]

No, you're wrong. Feel free to provide video or a transcript to show it.


Actually, we can say everyone knew about the discrepancy then, because first of all, Stenger testified about it in court.

Do you know that the defense didn't know about Bradley's correspondence when the prosecution knew about it?

BBm Your right I just re-read the closing and they did not mention the searches. It was in the opening statements.

I have no idea what either side knew or didn't know. Hopefully we all find out.

 

[jrb0124]

To agree with the jurors verdict is to totally ignore everything the State showed and argued.

The defense's attack on and undermining of every aspect of the State's case has been discussed in this thread throroughly.

What part of the State's case was compelling enough, and not contradicted by the defense, to yield proof beyond reasonable doubt that: (1) it was a homicide, and (2) Casey was the perp.

This is a huge thread, <modsnip>.

 

[cluciano63]

To agree with the jurors verdict is to totally ignore everything the State showed and argued.

I don't want to argue, and I did not totally ignore anything. I listened to every word of the trial, knowing almost nothing coming in, and weighed everything in my mind. I do believe Casey is guilty of something to do with Caylee's death, but I do not know what role she played, if she was alone in the death and/or cover-up, or if a premediated act took place, etc...I just don't. I do believe that someone as twisted as Casey appears to be might possibly use duct tape as a prop to make it look like Caylee was kidnapped, even if she died accidently. Just because something has not been (known to be) done before, does not mean it could not have happened, especially with someone as "unique" as Casey. And I believe if she had an actual plan, Caylee would not have been left anywhere near the Anthony home.

Yes I believe Casey disposed of Caylee; but there was not a charge for that. I do believe she was a careless, neglectful mother at times who could have left Caylee alone long enough to have an accident but that does match the way the charge for "Aggravated Child Abuse" reads, IIRC. And just because Dr. G says 100% of drownings that she is aware of are reported doesn't mean this unusual person would have reported it. For all I know, Haleigh Cummings may have drowned in the bathtub and the gang decided to cover it up. For all I know Trenton Duckett drowned and his crazy mother covered it up. These are not normal adults in these cases. Unusual things may have happened.

 

[Littleone48]

And that explains how we got the verdict.Make up something ,like video games that no one even brought up as any kind of evidence,and ignore the real circumstantial evidence.
I think that's exactly what this jury did,also,based the interviews with the foreman and #3.
Cheers !

I think the original poster was stating an opinion not a fact. The discussion was about the search words and the OP stated that she thought maybe the searchers were what a "gamer" would use. I took it as an OT comment. Maybe they will come back and explain but that was my take on it.

 

[kelian36]

The defense's attack on and undermining of every aspect of the State's case has been discussed in this thread throroughly.

What part of the State's case was compelling enough, and not contradicted by the defense, to yield proof beyond reasonable doubt that: (1) it was a homicide, and (2) Casey was the perp.

This is a huge thread, I am willing to bet that your reasons have been addressed already many times over.

You are confused, my post wasn't to you.