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

[pcrum12]

It's really amusing to me how many people are now coming forward and crawling out of the woodwork in support of the jury and the verdict. Many of them are people who didn't say a word before or who even stated they would find Casey guilty. I always get a kick out of human nature and the human desire to be on and to support the "winning" team in life.

Where were these people before the verdict was rendered? I know with OJ there were throngs of OJ supporters outside the courthouse during his trial. I'm sure there were some "Free Casey" picketers in Orange County, but I sure never heard about them. Casey seems to have her own little fan club now and it's growing in numbers by the day.

ETA: This post is NOT directed at WSers. I just want to make that clear.

I'm sorry but I feel a little offended by your post. I've been a true crime fan all my adult life (that's a long time lol). Rarely do I find one that I feel the defendant is innocent. However, in this case and from day 1, I had my doubts that this child was murdered. I've followed the case religiously, watched my share of the TH's, even NG and I've been around this board the whole time. One thing I know for sure is that the media had this girl convicted a long long time ago. And, hate to say, but the majority of the members of this board really bashed her and the DT all along and I found myself a minority on here. But, I stuck it out. Well, since the verdict I still find myself a minority and obviously after watching the trial and coming to a conclusion more members/guest also believe she is not guilty. This mob mentality that everyone is promoting is not only ridiculous but a slap at the very constitution we are so fortunate to have protect us. No, I didn't crawl out of the wordwork. I know you stated that you are not directing your post at WS but there are a few of us on here that do support the jury and their verdict. Thanks for listening.

 

[dodie20]

There period of inactivity, then the calls, then shes gone. Something happened in that time frame to Caylee. Was it murder? Was it pool death? I go with pool death because thats more likely than Casey, had this been a murder why call your parents? Then after not getting ahold of anyone, shes gone. It does not fit murder, no way. imo, that is.

After KC changed her story to a pool accident, something started bugging the heck out of me...the trunk stain. I did a little research, and found out that a drowning victim usually reverts to a semi fetal position. (for scientific reasons). So it seems that a drowning is consistent with the form of the stain in the trunk. Now, from what I could gather, the stain is up for interpretation, so I'm not trying to start a big debate...but in my mind anyway, the stain doesn't contradict a drowning. Yes, there could be other reasons, but it does make me more open to a drowning story. MOO.

 

[Aqua_Green_Bean]

I know! This is what is driving me crazy. The jury is taking the brunt of a lack in the evidence of which they were given to decide the fate of a human being, but no one seems angry at the prosecution or the investigators for, imo, messing up. Oh, geez, I need a beer!

And I think what is driving many of us crazy (or at least me, lest I speak for anyone else) is that the evidence WAS there. The jurors did just not know the rules to apply it properly when coming to a verdict. All of the jurors and alternates who have come out to speak have said "Oh well we didn't know the cause of death, there wasn't any DNA evidence, there wasn't any blood (?? She wasn't stabbed or shot, of course there was no blood :banghead.

You don't NEED those things to determine guilt. You don't need a DNA, fingerprinted covered murder weapon found next to a body with a concrete cause of death to find someone guilty, the circumstances surrounding the death were enough, and should have been enough of the jurors had taken the time to understand and follow the rules.

IMO, There is no reasonable explanation or circumstance that could have occurred for all of the pieces of evidence that the state presented to have come together the way they did, other than Casey killing her child.

 

[poco]

OFF TOPIC - If you are on facebook, show your support by changing your wall picture to a picture of Caylee...... and spread the word!

 

[goldenlover]

the DT bringing in the other computer results was HUGE for me. I thought WOW, how can the PT morally try to hide that.

I got the feeling there was a lot more that the PT was hiding also but fought to keep the DT from bringing it out. Very scary, especially in a DP case.

 

[pcrum12]

What still gets me is that for 5 months JB insisted that Caylee was alive and that KC shouldn't be charged with murder yet in his OS he said that Caylee died on June 16, 2008. If he knew that from the beginning then he lied all that time, hoping the body would never be found. If he didn't know that at the time that shows that they were reaching, looking for a plausible defense and the whole OS was fabricated.

It could simple mean that she didn't tell JB about the drowning for 5-6 months. Guess we will never know but he sure seemed to believe the drowning.

 

[badhorsie]

And I think what is driving many of us crazy (or at least me, lest I speak for anyone else) is that the evidence WAS there. The jurors did just not know the rules to apply it properly when coming to a verdict. All of the jurors and alternates who have come out to speak have said "Oh well we didn't know the cause of death, there wasn't any DNA evidence, there wasn't any blood (?? She wasn't stabbed or shot, of course there was no blood :banghead.

You don't NEED those things to determine guilt. You don't need a DNA, fingerprinted covered murder weapon found next to a body with a concrete cause of death to find someone guilty, the circumstances surrounding the death were enough, and should have been enough of the jurors had taken the time to understand and follow the rules.

IMO, There is no reasonable explanation or circumstance that could have occurred for all of the pieces of evidence that the state presented to have come together the way they did, other than Casey killing her child.

But what cold, hard evidence was there? Most of it was circumstantial and all of it was open to interpretation

 

[dodie20]

I know! This is what is driving me crazy. The jury is taking the brunt of a lack in the evidence of which they were given to decide the fate of a human being, but no one seems angry at the prosecution or the investigators for, imo, messing up. Oh, geez, I need a beer!

Even though I don't necessarily disagree with the verdict, (at least the murder charge), I do have some problems with the jury...especially the female juror's speculation of GA. It went way too far, IMO. But I also have some problems with the prosecution. A lot of witness account was left out of the trial, that could have painted a clearer picture. I can't even guess at why more evidence wasn't brought in. All in all, I wasn't satisfied with their job...too many unanswered questions. I wish they had downgraded the charges. As for LE, I'm a little more generous. Except for not taking Kronk more seriously, (which boggles the mind), I think they put together the best case they could. They had to sift through a mountain of lies and diversion and it isn't their fault this was labeled a death penalty case. They gathered enough evidence, IMO, for KC to be found guilty of something. What makes me mad, is thinking about all of their hard work and hours upon hours of investigation, being wasted. I noticed in an interview, the female juror basically passed the buck to the prosecution and in another interview, the prosecution passed the buck to the investigators. Well, I didn't appreciate that. The juror, instead of being defensive and whining about how we should be mad at the prosecution, should have just pounded home that we really shouldn't be mad at anyone, because the tangible evidence, which is so necessary in a death penalty case, just didn't exist. But instead of standing her ground on tangibles and logic, she went into, what I considered, a wild speculation of GA. There was a lot less tangible evidence pointing to him than there was to KC, but one got a pass and the other got the shaft. I guess what I'm trying to say is...investigators, the prosecution, and the jury all made mistakes, but considering the hefty charges, I think the right decision was made...but maybe for the wrong reasons. MOO.

 

[GracieLu]

According to the leaked records, Casey made six calls to her parents on the afternoon of June 16, with the first call at 3:03pm to her father's cell phone and the last of the six made to her mom's cell phone at 4:24. During that time she also tried her mother at work and called her ex-fiancé, Jesse Grund.

To the left of this page is the evidence archive.

http://www.wftv.com/news/17180007/detail.html

thats a great point, the flury of calls... she did make 6 calls to her parents that afternoon and none were answered. Why? She walked out of that house earlier stating Zanny was watching Caylee. There wasn't a Zanny. Who was watching Caylee? Maybe "Zanny" was in a car accident. Maybe "Zanny" couldn't watch Caylee afterall. She had a date with TL that night. Maybe CA and GA knew why she was calling. Maybe they didn't pick up the phone on purpose. Maybe it was the last straw when ICA stole money from Grandma the 2nd time. Maybe ICA took matters in her own hands at that point!

this works just as well as maybe she drowned and in my opinion the evidence supports my theory more... of course this is my opinion and i respect yours as well,,,,, i will at least agree to disagree....

 

[Chablis]

thats a great point, the flury of calls... she did make 6 calls to her parents that afternoon and none were answered. Why? She walked out of that house earlier stating Zanny was watching Caylee. There wasn't a Zanny. Who was watching Caylee? Maybe "Zanny" was in a car accident. Maybe "Zanny" couldn't watch Caylee afterall. She had a date with TL that night. Maybe CA and GA knew why she was calling. Maybe they didn't pick up the phone on purpose. Maybe it was the last straw when ICA stole money from Grandma the 2nd time. Maybe ICA took matters in her own hands at that point!

Yeah, but there was no Zanny and she was at the house with Caylee, as she lied about having a job as well. And there is an hour of unusual activity,and an unsupervised child and a pool. So, for some its more logical to believe this then thinking Scientist Casey was knocking Caylee out for short periods of times to party. Makes no sense.

 

[Aqua_Green_Bean]

But what cold, hard evidence was there? Most of it was circumstantial and all of it was open to interpretation

I don't need cold, hard evidence. I looked at all of the evidence that the state presented - Casey last one to see Caylee, not reporting Caylee dead/missing for 31 days, made up the nanny story, partied for a month, chloroform in the car, "How to Make Chloroform" searched on the computer, smell of death in the car, hair with death band in the car, body found in a bag that matched a bag at the mothers house, duct tape found on the remains that was the same duct tape found at the house. Maybe on their own each one of those pieces of evidence would not be enough. But when you look at ALL of those things together, that is enough evidence, IMO. And again IMO there is no reasonable way to explain any other way those things could have happened.

I would really like to hear a situation where all of those things could have occurred that doesn't involve Casey killing her daughter. Could you, or someone who feels that the evidence was not there, please tell a situation or circumstance where all the presented evidence could have occurred?

 

[Never4GetCaylee]

I don't need cold, hard evidence. I looked at all of the evidence that the state presented - Casey last one to see Caylee, not reporting Caylee dead/missing for 31 days, made up the nanny story, partied for a month, chloroform in the car, "How to Make Chloroform" searched on the computer, smell of death in the car, hair with death band in the car, body found in a bag that matched a bag at the mothers house, duct tape found on the remains that was the same duct tape found at the house. Maybe on their own each one of those pieces of evidence would not be enough. But when you look at ALL of those things together, that is enough evidence, IMO. And again IMO there is no reasonable way to explain any other way those things could have happened.

I would really like to hear a situation where all of those things could have occurred that doesn't involve Casey killing her daughter. Could you, or someone who feels that the evidence was not there, please tell a situation or circumstance where all the presented evidence could have occurred?

Exactly. Sometimes you have to put things together. Does the jury know that there are cases won where there is no BODY. Those juries didn't need the physical proof that a person was dead. They were able to figure it out and put the evidence together. Sometimes there is no smoking gun, no road map, no video tape, and you have to actually think and use your head.

 

[wfgodot]

I don't need cold, hard evidence.

(snipped)

I think that says it all. You'd vote guilty in a first degree, death penalty case based on "common sense" and a scattering of expert testimony countered by the defense. Circumstantial evidence, if it forms a totality, is indeed effective evidence. But to think that that is what the jury had here is to have viewed the trial through different eyes than my own.

What I don't understand is the lack of anger at the prosecutor's office for overcharging this case based on the evidence at hand, then sending two loyal assistant prosecutors out to try a pig in a poke. Casey might have been jailed for years to come if the charges had have been less extreme. A body of people charged with ruling on a case which might result in the state putting a person to death demands higher proof.

Yes, sometimes you have to "put things together," but this jigsaw puzzle was missing several of its key pieces.

 

[beccalecca1]

Add that to GA being the last to see Caylee and Casey and they never pulled his cell phone records and pings?! This is standard stuff for any investigation of this kind.

Exactly, and how about not pulling anything on Roy Kronk either, the guy who found Caylee's body at least 3 times, if not more. The LE didn't find any of this worth their time, instead they're going to look into each and everyone of Casey's friends, ex boyfriend, etc. ?

When JB began talking about how their case was solely focused on Casey in court, it was pretty clear to me that was the truth. I'm still bothered that they didn't get DNA from Roy Kronk, who admittedly urinated in/near the crime scene. You're going to go on his word that he didn't touch the crime scene, 6 months after the beginning of this investigation with all the other lies that have circulated? Really?

I don't think he applied duct tape though, as someone suggested before. He didn't have access to that specific brand of tape (that I know of), and why would he? Plus, the tape that was found on scene had clearly been there for a while. But, I do believe he manipulated the scene.

 

[Wendy101]

IMO- if people want to lay blame on anyone-it should be on GA, CA and Lee -for lying. under oath-

 

[nursebeeme]

(snipped)

I think that says it all. You'd vote guilty in a first degree, death penalty case based on "common sense" and a scattering of expert testimony countered by the defense. Circumstantial evidence, if it forms a totality, is indeed effective evidence. But to think that that is what the jury had here is to have viewed the trial through different eyes than my own.

What I don't understand is the lack of anger at the prosecutor's office for overcharging this case based on the evidence at hand, then sending two loyal assistant prosecutors out to try a pig in a poke. Casey might have been jailed for years to come if the charges had have been less extreme. A body of people charged with ruling on a case which might result in the state putting a person to death demands higher proof.

Yes, sometimes you have to "put things together," but this jigsaw puzzle was missing several of its key pieces.

bbm

I agree with you woof.

When the state rested their case in chief I recall posting, "is that all?"

while less may be more in some cases I think more would have been better here in the SA case in chief.

I think they may have been too focused on strategy and possible cross examination by the defense and points brought up by them...

it is all truly hindsight now however...

we all have our hindsight goggles on... I am sure the State does as well imhoo

 

[dodie20]

I don't need cold, hard evidence. I looked at all of the evidence that the state presented - Casey last one to see Caylee, not reporting Caylee dead/missing for 31 days, made up the nanny story, partied for a month, chloroform in the car, "How to Make Chloroform" searched on the computer, smell of death in the car, hair with death band in the car, body found in a bag that matched a bag at the mothers house, duct tape found on the remains that was the same duct tape found at the house. Maybe on their own each one of those pieces of evidence would not be enough. But when you look at ALL of those things together, that is enough evidence, IMO. And again IMO there is no reasonable way to explain any other way those things could have happened.

I would really like to hear a situation where all of those things could have occurred that doesn't involve Casey killing her daughter. Could you, or someone who feels that the evidence was not there, please tell a situation or circumstance where all the presented evidence could have occurred?

I get your point, I really do, but some of us, although we think KC's guilty of something, still needed more to warrant a death penalty. and my guess to your question about KC being the only possible murderer, is the reason she brought her father into the mix. He can also be tied to these things. Her new story made sense as far as explaining away the hard evidence and everything else was blamed on family dysfunction. That new story really did make some room for reasonable doubt, especially for people who hadn't kept up with the case. Zanny the nanny was relegated to not much more than a bit player-a figment of one of KC's 'dysfunctional' lies. MOO.

 

[beccalecca1]

I'm sorry but I feel a little offended by your post. I've been a true crime fan all my adult life (that's a long time lol). Rarely do I find one that I feel the defendant is innocent. However, in this case and from day 1, I had my doubts that this child was murdered. I've followed the case religiously, watched my share of the TH's, even NG and I've been around this board the whole time. One thing I know for sure is that the media had this girl convicted a long long time ago. And, hate to say, but the majority of the members of this board really bashed her and the DT all along and I found myself a minority on here. But, I stuck it out. Well, since the verdict I still find myself a minority and obviously after watching the trial and coming to a conclusion more members/guest also believe she is not guilty. This mob mentality that everyone is promoting is not only ridiculous but a slap at the very constitution we are so fortunate to have protect us. No, I didn't crawl out of the wordwork. I know you stated that you are not directing your post at WS but there are a few of us on here that do support the jury and their verdict. Thanks for listening.

:clap::clap::clap::clap: Thank you!!

Although I didn't crawl out of the woodwork on WS (I joined during the trial to look up a lot of documents and theories of WSers), I took a bashing on a WSer's youtube channel for this case and was very open about my thoughts of innocence, and the lack of evidence. Just because I'm posting here now doesn't mean that I'm going along with whatever the jury thinks. I would've still thought there wasn't enough evidence if she was guilty.

 

[wfgodot]

When the state rested their case in chief I recall posting, "is that all?"

Me too. I'm, like, what? This big bad state case, which, for years, I've heard drumming in the distance like the sounds of coming battle, was - that? That was it??

 

[Chablis]

I get your point, I really do, but some of us, although we think KC's guilty of something, still needed more to warrant a death penalty. and my guess to your question about KC being the only possible murderer, is the reason she brought her father into the mix. He can also be tied to these things. Her new story made sense as far as explaining away the hard evidence and everything else was blamed on family dysfunction. That new story really did make some room for reasonable doubt, especially for people who hadn't kept up with the case. Zanny the nanny was relegated to not much more than a bit player-a figment of one of KC's 'dysfunctional' lies. MOO.

I also thought that you have 12 people, and more than half have more than likely run into or had some weird family members with mental illness to some extent. I think that played a role in all of this as well.