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

[gngr~snap]

re: Judge Perry stating absolutely no evidence of sexual abuse.

I wanted to point out, the psychologist could believe she was sexually abused. The psychologist was examining her to see if she was fit to proceed with trial - her overall mental state at that time. Judge Perry was basing his determination of the evidence and testimony before the court. There could be plenty of evidence of sexual abuse that was not let in because of the rules of evidence. Furthermore, that psychologist could even say, "Yes, she's displaying all the signs of an incest survivor" - but that does not necessarily render her unfit to stand trial. The psychologist determination is not tied at all to Judge Perry's determination on whether sexual abuse could be discussed in closing. They're two unrelated things.[/quote]

Jeff Ashton himself told the news reporter there was. He comes on a 4:30min (ish)

When asked if he was surprised by JB opening statement...

"We had known that through some discovery in the case which was sealed from public view because of the Gr - the ah, the nature of it. So we knew that"

ETA: JB chose not to bring it in...
[ame]http://video.foxnews.com/v/1041513351001/casey-anthony-prosecutor-reflects-on-trial-verdict/?playlist_id=87485[/ame]

 

[Chablis]

yes he did say that in his opening statement along with something along the lines of "drowning is very common, happens all the time" to which I ask you, why would GA, a former LE officer, try to cover up a common event - an "ACCIDENT" and make it look like a murder/kidnapping?

and again, ICA walked out of the house on June 16th stating she was going to work and Zanny was watching Caylee. We all know she had no job and no "Zanny" but she did have a date but no babysitter! WHO WAS WATCHING CAYLEE?

Well, I personally dont think anyone but Casey had anything to do with this, so I dont factor anything George in. I can tell from the records when she found Caylee she called George first. And from her cell pings she never walked out of the house on the 16th that night. She texted all night from the Anthony home.

 

[1Chump]

So judge Perry didn't actually rule that the defense presented enough evidence of the drowning theory that they could argue it in their closing?

Thanks for clearing that up.

Wow way to take what i said out of context.

The State objected to the Defense mentioning the drowning theory in closing as they did not present evidence to the jury. Judge Perry ruled they presented enough evidence to argue the drowning theory to the jury.

However, Judge Perry did not specify in his order the evidence that supported the theory.

 

[Baznme]

re: Judge Perry stating absolutely no evidence of sexual abuse.

I wanted to point out, the psychologist could believe she was sexually abused. The psychologist was examining her to see if she was fit to proceed with trial - her overall mental state at that time. Judge Perry was basing his determination of the evidence and testimony before the court. There could be plenty of evidence of sexual abuse that was not let in because of the rules of evidence. Furthermore, that psychologist could even say, "Yes, she's displaying all the signs of an incest survivor" - but that does not necessarily render her unfit to stand trial. The psychologist determination is not tied at all to Judge Perry's determination on whether sexual abuse could be discussed in closing. They're two unrelated things.

Jeff Ashton himself told the news reporter there was. He comes on a 4:30min (ish)

When asked if he was surprised by JB opening statement...

"We had known that through some discovery in the case which was sealed from public view because of the Gr - the ah, the nature of it. So we knew that"

ETA: JB chose not to bring it in...
[ame]http://video.foxnews.com/v/1041513351001/casey-anthony-prosecutor-reflects-on-trial-verdict/?playlist_id=87485[/ame][/QUOTE]

Video seems to be gone.

 

[1Chump]

which was triple bagged and thrown in a swamp. It was not reported. There was duct tape on her face according to the testimony as it had held the mandible in place and there is no reason for duct tape to be on a child's face. There was also the fact that the ME said 100% of the accidents/drownings that occur are reported/911 is called. The mother lied for a month about where the child was. Then the mother lied about a nanny kidnapping the child. This lie was maintained for months/years.

So, to me, it is completely unreasonable to disregard the evidence and testimony in order to believe a story that first surfaces in a murder trial 3 years after the death and after the defendant has been sitting in prison for all that time and to believe, despite the fact no other accidental drowning has ever happened in this way, that somehow all the evidence is wrong and misleading and that, in fact, the most likely cause of a duct taped body triple bagged in a swamp with a cover story of a kidnapping nanny which story is only told after 31 days and a parent forcing the issue and despite the fact that this terrible accident caused absolutely no distress to the mother as evidenced by her renting movies and spending the next day in bed having sex with her boyfriend and then entering a hot body contest and partying for a month and the smell of decomposition and a death banded hair in the trunk, the most likely cause, was an accident. Despite all the aforementioned, we are supposed to believe that it is reasonable to conclude that it was just an accident and no one's fault and therefore no one needs to be punished for anything.

Everything you just typed was presented by the State. You appear to completely disregard any evidence or testimony presented by the Defense. It was NEVER up to the Defense to prove her innocent. It was up to the State to prove her guilty.

Yes, those are the "facts" the State presented. However, the defense through cross and the case they presented disputed the body in the trunk, the duct tape being the muder weapon, that Casey was the only person who it could be. That provided testimony to show that Casey's actions were not a result of Caylee's death. For her, for her family, that was normal behavior in that family.

The jury weighed the testimony and evidence according to the instructions they were given and determined that the STATE DID NOT PROVE ALL THOSE FACTS.

Hence, the jury brought the only verdict they could legally bring.

 

[Baznme]

Well, I personally dont think anyone but Casey had anything to do with this, so I dont factor anything George in. I can tell from the records when she found Caylee she called George first. And from her cell pings she never walked out of the house on the 16th that night. She texted all night from the Anthony home.

Are you sure? According to the records, she never went back to the house that night. She was at TonE's watching movies and stayed overnight there. No one saw Caylee after she left the house with KC that afternoon is what I understood.

 

[Chablis]

Everything you just typed was presented by the State. You appear to completely disregard any evidence or testimony presented by the Defense. It was NEVER up to the Defense to prove her innocent. It was up to the State to prove her guilty.

Yes, those are the "facts" the State presented. However, the defense through cross and the case they presented disputed the body in the trunk, the duct tape being the muder weapon, that Casey was the only person who it could be. That provided testimony to show that Casey's actions were not a result of Caylee's death. For her, for her family, that was normal behavior in that family.

The jury weighed the testimony and evidence according to the instructions they were given and determined that the STATE DID NOT PROVE ALL THOSE FACTS.

Hence, the jury brought the only verdict they could legally bring.

Had the State actually paid attention to the real case and not the public and media support and over charged her, this would also be different. Had they even entertained a pool death happened, they could have shown in the time period where all hell broke loose something happened, and Casey being inactive for an hour due to being up all night texting, sleeping, caused her to leave her child unattended and caused a death! She probably would have gotten some time, and maybe even unlawful disposal of a corpse. But the State decided to try to say she killed her child with chloroform.

Unreal actually.

 

[1Chump]

I honestly have a hard time believing the jury acquitted Casey because they believe George molested her. In my eyes, there was far more evidence of having no link then just this one piece of the puzzle. George's behavior on the stand alone was enough to convince me that he's hiding something. I couldn't believe how combative he was during this trial; was this whole thing a joke to him?

If you took away the accusations of molestation, one major thing that sticks out to me is: Who calls in to report gas cans stolen but doesn't report smelling a dead body in their daughter's car when you haven't seen your grand daughter in a month? Who does that? Someone who perhaps knows something?

To me, the evidence of molestation is both in George's demeanor and Casey's behavior. George, on the stand, acted like an arrogant man who's above the law. IMO, he's gotten away with a crime for so long that "Ha! They're not going to get me now". Casey behaved, in my eyes, like many people who suffer incestuous abuse; especially if that abuse was coming from their father.

MOO :twocents:

A former cop caused an officer to have to fill out paperwork on stolen gas cans. However, that same former cop "failed" to notify the police that the gas cans were stolen. That former cop also NEVER used the incident to his advantage to try to find his missing Granddaughter.

Seriously, George had not seen his granddaughter in about two weeks but never attempted to try to force Casey when he had the chance that day. He could have refused to allow Casey to take his car. He could have told Casey if I do not talk to Caylee on the phone right now, I will call the cops and report Caylee missing.

IMO, in the closing when LDB talked about Casey telling her friend that her Dad (George) must have hit an animal when he had her car, I wondered if the gas cans were reported stolen to make a record to try to put Casey with the car.

 

[Baznme]

Everything you just typed was presented by the State. You appear to completely disregard any evidence or testimony presented by the Defense. It was NEVER up to the Defense to prove her innocent. It was up to the State to prove her guilty.

Yes, those are the "facts" the State presented. However, the defense through cross and the case they presented disputed the body in the trunk, the duct tape being the muder weapon, that Casey was the only person who it could be. That provided testimony to show that Casey's actions were not a result of Caylee's death. For her, for her family, that was normal behavior in that family.

The jury weighed the testimony and evidence according to the instructions they were given and determined that the STATE DID NOT PROVE ALL THOSE FACTS.

Hence, the jury brought the only verdict they could legally bring.

In essence, what you are saying is this was the best decision they could come up with from the case that was riddled with lies and mistakes. That's the best I can take from it to accept this jury's decision. If only, Cindy hadn't lied, if only the computer specialist had not read the search for chloroform as 84 times as opposed to one, if only Kronk had not poked the remains with a stick, if only the police officer had done his job better when Kronk first reported finding the remains, if only Dr. Vass had been a "chemist", if only the FBI hadn't compromised the evidence with leaving their own DNA on a piece of duct tape....I get that. But.......to say that "for her, for her family, that was normal behavior in that family" is a stretch and a complete disregard for the judge's instructions to not only use the evidence in making their decision, but also their common sense. I do not see where that occurred here. Not trying to be argumentative, just truly do not understand how this could have happened. I don't think the jury knows what "reasonable" doubt means.

 

[gngr~snap]

Jeff Ashton himself told the news reporter there was. He comes on a 4:30min (ish)

When asked if he was surprised by JB opening statement...

"We had known that through some discovery in the case which was sealed from public view because of the Gr - the ah, the nature of it. So we knew that"

ETA: JB chose not to bring it in...
http://video.foxnews.com/v/10415133...-reflects-on-trial-verdict/?playlist_id=87485

Video seems to be gone.[/QUOTE]

click on fox news at the top.
i still think it's a separate matter and shouldn't have been allowed in for her trail

 

[gngr~snap]

A former cop caused an officer to have to fill out paperwork on stolen gas cans. However, that same former cop "failed" to notify the police that the gas cans were stolen. That former cop also NEVER used the incident to his advantage to try to find his missing Granddaughter.

Seriously, George had not seen his granddaughter in about two weeks but never attempted to try to force Casey when he had the chance that day. He could have refused to allow Casey to take his car. He could have told Casey if I do not talk to Caylee on the phone right now, I will call the cops and report Caylee missing.

IMO, in the closing when LDB talked about Casey telling her friend that her Dad (George) must have hit an animal when he had her car, I wondered if the gas cans were reported stolen to make a record to try to put Casey with the car.

What I do not get is if she was riding around with the knowledge that was decomp- why would she tell anyone the car smelled?
LA told the police that Tony said they never drove her car and that her dad did have it at the shop for a few days, but he also said TL was lying... FWIW... never found TL interview.
JB said he was trying to set her up...by reporting the cans.

http://www.examiner.com/crime-in-na...-lee-anthony-s-prosecution-deposition-july-30

 

[Baznme]

A former cop caused an officer to have to fill out paperwork on stolen gas cans. However, that same former cop "failed" to notify the police that the gas cans were stolen. That former cop also NEVER used the incident to his advantage to try to find his missing Granddaughter.

Seriously, George had not seen his granddaughter in about two weeks but never attempted to try to force Casey when he had the chance that day. He could have refused to allow Casey to take his car. He could have told Casey if I do not talk to Caylee on the phone right now, I will call the cops and report Caylee missing.

IMO, in the closing when LDB talked about Casey telling her friend that her Dad (George) must have hit an animal when he had her car, I wondered if the gas cans were reported stolen to make a record to try to put Casey with the car.

If you look at the timeline, the gas was stolen on 6/23. Reported on the 24th. He hadn't seen in his grandaughter in "one" week at that point so, I do not see your point since he didn't know she was "missing" yet.

 

[1Chump]

Everything you just typed was presented by the State. You appear to completely disregard any evidence or testimony presented by the Defense. It was NEVER up to the Defense to prove her innocent. It was up to the State to prove her guilty.

Yes, those are the "facts" the State presented. However, the defense through cross and the case they presented disputed the body in the trunk, the duct tape being the muder weapon, that Casey was the only person who it could be. That provided testimony to show that Casey's actions were not a result of Caylee's death. For her, for her family, that was normal behavior in that family.

The jury weighed the testimony and evidence according to the instructions they were given and determined that the STATE DID NOT PROVE ALL THOSE FACTS.

Hence, the jury brought the only verdict they could legally bring.

In essence, what you are saying is this was the best decision they could come up with from the case that was riddled with lies and mistakes. That's the best I can take from it to accept this jury's decision. If only, Cindy hadn't lied, if only the computer specialist had not read the search for chloroform as 84 times as opposed to one, if only Kronk had not poked the remains with a stick, if only the police officer had done his job better when Kronk first reported finding the remains, if only Dr. Vass had been a "chemist", if only the FBI hadn't compromised the evidence with leaving their own DNA on a piece of duct tape....I get that. But.......to say that "for her, for her family, that was normal behavior in that family" is a stretch and a complete disregard for the judge's instructions to not only use the evidence in making their decision, but also their common sense. I do not see where that occurred here. Not trying to be argumentative, just truly do not understand how this could have happened. I don't think the jury knows what "reasonable" doubt means.

Both George and Cindy Anthony were impeached during the case. Fact - they lied. Cindy testified the last time she saw Caylee was the night before, June 15George testified the last time he saw Caylee was June 16 when she left with Casey. Three people in that house. With both Cindy and George being impeached, when was the last time Caylee was seen alive? Who was responsible for Caylee the last time she was seen alive?

The evidence was not lies or mistakes....it was the State only putting on evidence to support their theory.

The 84 chloroform hits was the Canadian guy who had a new computer program to sell to police. The State used that report because it supported their theory better. The State decided not to use the report prepared by the State's own crime guy which showed chloroform had only been searched one time and myspace had 84 hits.

In a nutshell, the State did what they usually accuse the defense of doing. The State found experts outside their own people who would testify to what supported their case the best. While the defense used the State's very own "employees" as well as FBI employees to counter most of the States evidence.

It would not have helped if Dr. Vass was a chemist. Because his research has not been verified by other scientists. So you have Dr. Vass with an unproven "method" get a extremely high reading of chloroform from "air" while scientists using proven methods cannot find enough chloroform in the lining to explain the air levels.

The State put the guy on to talk about the blow fly "leg" and the "gnats" to show a body was in the car. However, the defense shows that a blow fly "leg" is nothing if there was a dead body and it was all contained in the trash. You know that trash that was in a dumpster for while before it was picked up.

The smell in the car could or could not be true. Yes, some smelled it But those who smelled it had already been told there was a smell. So did they really smell it? Or did they expect to smell that horrible smell that the minute they even think of it, they smell it when there is nothing there? The police officers who did not know there was a smell of decomp in the car, did not smell it either in the car or in the garage. Yes, the smell should have been in the garage from Cindy opening the trunk.

The only "evidence" of the duct tape on the mouth was the "location" below the skull with the hair attached. However, the State themselves presented evidence that animals had scattered the bones. The defense presented testimony from Cindy and Lee that it was normal in that family to buy beloved pets in garbage bags with duct tape. It is a reasonable possibility when the animals were scattering the bones, the hair got stuck to the duct tape at that time. Despite the residue still being there to hold the hair to the tape, there was not even one little skin cell to show the tape was ever attached to Caylee's skin.

So while you believe everything the State presented. It is reasonable that the jury believed the "doubt" raised by the defense either through cross or testimony.

 

[Baznme]

Video seems to be gone.

click on fox news at the top.
i still think it's a separate matter and shouldn't have been allowed in for her trail[/QUOTE]

Yup, I listened to it 3 times. There was something entered into discovery, has been sealed (due to the graphic nature of it) and JA expected would come out at trial, however, that didn't happen so he was very surprised that the defense didn't play that card. That being said, whatever IS under seal, HHJP is aware of yet, he stated to there is no evidence that she was sexually abused by either her father OR brother, so JB would not be able to use that scenario in the closing argument. Hmmmmmmm.....wonder if that will be unsealed at some point now that the trial is over.

 

[CathyR]

I think the jury had no choice but to acquit. The duct tape is ludicrous as a murder weapon. Tell me how does the tape retain enough stickiness to adhere to the bone and hold the mandible to the skull but retains no skin cells on it. The heart sticker residue could have come from her shirt just like all the letters and other decals from it. Kronk did tamper with the evidence by moving things around. The skull is full of dirt but his moving of it with a stick doesn't dislodge the tape and mandible. This goes to far for me to believe the manner of death the prosecution put forth. The chloroform searches do nothing for me as I have weird stuff I have looked up on my computer. You might decide I am a terrorist or murderer from all the stuff I have looked up in regards to just websleuths cases. The body in a trunk was not proven but even if it was true I ask why did Casey hang on to Caylee's body so long. Long enough for it to start to decompose and emit fluids from the bag. Someone who can't let her go or someone who just quickly dumps her body in a local illegal dump site. Her constant lies only convinced me that yes this is a woman who would lie about an accident as she can take no responsibility for any action that is less than perfect. The manner of death is very very important when it comes to deciding intent. Intent is needed to convict for murder. The jury was not willing to find her guilty because she partied and acted as if nothing was wrong. No silly string graveside party conviction here. The jury knew the difference, acts of bad social behavior does not make one guilty. The prosecution could have easily won a simple manslaughter charge but failed to include that. They tried too hard to prove a DP case when they could have easily proven a lesser charge and then planted the seeds of doubt that it was accidental.
The whole Anthony family was unbelievable. I understand she lied all her life and was quite good at it. The parents allowed this to go on ask yourself why?I would double check everything my kid said if I had one pulling the stunts she did. I would have least have known she wasn't working. It isn't that she is excused for it but her lying worked to her advantage. Being an admitted liar, it is more believable that she would dispose of a body when she didn't need to. Many said she was psychopathic but then they say she used chloroform to knock Caylee out so she wouldn't be scared while being suffocated by the duct tape. Why would a psychopath care? Casey has a lot of bad social issues that have already gotten her into legal trouble. She isn't an accomplished thief which is a simpler crime to pull off and hide than murder is. The prosecution overcharged her and didn't charge her with what the jury and the legal system was able to PROVE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. The doubts the jury had are very well founded as they are the crux of any murder case. INTENT to kill.

The tape is reasonably explained as a by product of Kronk's moving the bag it makes more sense that the part of the tape that did retain some stickiness was originally on the OUTSIDE of the bag. The part retaining enough adhesive quality to later adhere to the bones when disturbed was in contact with the bag. If in contact with a decomposing body it would have lost all its ability to stick to anything. The fluids produced would have broken down the glue. Fluids exude from our natural body orifices. Mouth, nose, ( high bacterial growth there too) the very areas the tape was supposed to be in contact with. Another source for the heart sticker is it makes more sense that someone would mark the tape to tell it apart from other garbage bags by placing the heart sticker on the tape on the outside of the bag. I don't believe that the tape was used to kill her. I don't believe the chloroform came from anything other than Cindy generously spraying the trunk, car, Caylee's doll, other items from the car with a FeBreeze like product. Other people at the scene saw her doing this as well. I believe Casey was negligent in watching Caylee. Caylee got into the pool on her own. She could have stacked toys or buckets until she managed to crawl in. A 2 year old in Seminole Texas died earlier this year doing exactly that. Casey changed her clothes hid the evidence of the drowning and deposited her in the dump area. She may have gone back to bury her later thus borrowing the shovel but either removing all traces of any dirt from the scene or finding the area flooded and inaccessible she didn't bury her deep. She floated and Kronk saw her in August.

This was the time when the police dropped the ball BIG TIME. Failure to fully investigate the wooded area nearest to the Anthony home when Caylee was reported missing, they knew Casey was lying about Zanny, and they have a report from a utility worker who thinks he has seen human remains near the home. This is what could have made the case. Evidence of what she died of tells us accidental, or homicide, (I doubt natural at her young age.) Ruling that because the body was dumped and duct tape was found adhering to the skull that the cause of death was homicide is far fetched. Trying to tie it into the intent is where the prosecution lost the jury. The evidence of concealment is normally an admission of guilt but when you have a woman who lies like she did and lives the lifestyle she did then you have someone incapable of being blamed as that would require taking personal responsibility. Just when someone says never then something occurs to prove them wrong. Dr. G. has seen or heard of 1 case before where the body was dumped after an accident. I believe it has happened in Texas when someone hit someone in a car and fled the scene taking the person lodged in their windshield home with them and parking the car in the garage. The person hit was very drunk and stumbled in front of the car, if the individual who hit him had done the right thing and stopped it would have been an accident and no liability would have occurred. Instead the drunk guy dies still lodged in the windshield and they are caught. People do not always make rational decisions under stress and life and death situations. Do you think Casey able to make rational decisions? I think no one thinks her able to. Lie about it Yes we can all believe that.

 

[Baznme]

Both George and Cindy Anthony were impeached during the case. Fact - they lied. Cindy testified the last time she saw Caylee was the night before, June 15George testified the last time he saw Caylee was June 16 when she left with Casey. Three people in that house. With both Cindy and George being impeached, when was the last time Caylee was seen alive? Who was responsible for Caylee the last time she was seen alive?

The evidence was not lies or mistakes....it was the State only putting on evidence to support their theory.

The 84 chloroform hits was the Canadian guy who had a new computer program to sell to police. The State used that report because it supported their theory better. The State decided not to use the report prepared by the State's own crime guy which showed chloroform had only been searched one time and myspace had 84 hits.

In a nutshell, the State did what they usually accuse the defense of doing. The State found experts outside their own people who would testify to what supported their case the best. While the defense used the State's very own "employees" as well as FBI employees to counter most of the States evidence.

It would not have helped if Dr. Vass was a chemist. Because his research has not been verified by other scientists. So you have Dr. Vass with an unproven "method" get a extremely high reading of chloroform from "air" while scientists using proven methods cannot find enough chloroform in the lining to explain the air levels.

The State put the guy on to talk about the blow fly "leg" and the "gnats" to show a body was in the car. However, the defense shows that a blow fly "leg" is nothing if there was a dead body and it was all contained in the trash. You know that trash that was in a dumpster for while before it was picked up.

The smell in the car could or could not be true. Yes, some smelled it But those who smelled it had already been told there was a smell. So did they really smell it? Or did they expect to smell that horrible smell that the minute they even think of it, they smell it when there is nothing there? The police officers who did not know there was a smell of decomp in the car, did not smell it either in the car or in the garage. Yes, the smell should have been in the garage from Cindy opening the trunk.

The only "evidence" of the duct tape on the mouth was the "location" below the skull with the hair attached. However, the State themselves presented evidence that animals had scattered the bones. The defense presented testimony from Cindy and Lee that it was normal in that family to buy beloved pets in garbage bags with duct tape. It is a reasonable possibility when the animals were scattering the bones, the hair got stuck to the duct tape at that time. Despite the residue still being there to hold the hair to the tape, there was not even one little skin cell to show the tape was ever attached to Caylee's skin.

So while you believe everything the State presented. It is reasonable that the jury believed the "doubt" raised by the defense either through cross or testimony.

Thank you....I mean that.....for explaining in such detail as to how or why the jurors would have seen it that way. I would have felt a lot better about the verdict had you been on the jury......LOL.....however, the "if only's" I addressed in my previous post, not all, but several had been done differently, she would have been "done". MOO

 

[1Chump]

What I do not get is if she was riding around with the knowledge that was decomp- why would she tell anyone the car smelled?
LA told the police that Tony said they never drove her car and that her dad did have it at the shop for a few days, but he also said TL was lying... FWIW... never found TL interview.
JB said he was trying to set her up...by reporting the cans.

http://www.examiner.com/crime-in-na...-lee-anthony-s-prosecution-deposition-july-30

What I do not understand is that she first started planning the perfect murder in March yet NEVER one time considered getting rid of the body in a way that it would not evidence linked to her.

 

[Baznme]

I think the jury had no choice but to acquit. The duct tape is ludicrous as a murder weapon. Tell me how does the tape retain enough stickiness to adhere to the bone and hold the mandible to the skull but retains no skin cells on it. The heart sticker residue could have come from her shirt just like all the letters and other decals from it. Kronk did tamper with the evidence by moving things around. The skull is full of dirt but his moving of it with a stick doesn't dislodge the tape and mandible. This goes to far for me to believe the manner of death the prosecution put forth. The chloroform searches do nothing for me as I have weird stuff I have looked up on my computer. You might decide I am a terrorist or murderer from all the stuff I have looked up in regards to just websleuths cases. The body in a trunk was not proven but even if it was true I ask why did Casey hang on to Caylee's body so long. Long enough for it to start to decompose and emit fluids from the bag. Someone who can't let her go or someone who just quickly dumps her body in a local illegal dump site. Her constant lies only convinced me that yes this is a woman who would lie about an accident as she can take no responsibility for any action that is less than perfect. The manner of death is very very important when it comes to deciding intent. Intent is needed to convict for murder. The jury was not willing to find her guilty because she partied and acted as if nothing was wrong. No silly string graveside party conviction here. The jury knew the difference, acts of bad social behavior does not make one guilty. The prosecution could have easily won a simple manslaughter charge but failed to include that. They tried too hard to prove a DP case when they could have easily proven a lesser charge and then planted the seeds of doubt that it was accidental.
The whole Anthony family was unbelievable. I understand she lied all her life and was quite good at it. The parents allowed this to go on ask yourself why?I would double check everything my kid said if I had one pulling the stunts she did. I would have least have known she wasn't working. It isn't that she is excused for it but her lying worked to her advantage. Being an admitted liar, it is more believable that she would dispose of a body when she didn't need to. Many said she was psychopathic but then they say she used chloroform to knock Caylee out so she wouldn't be scared while being suffocated by the duct tape. Why would a psychopath care? Casey has a lot of bad social issues that have already gotten her into legal trouble. She isn't an accomplished thief which is a simpler crime to pull off and hide than murder is. The prosecution overcharged her and didn't charge her with what the jury and the legal system was able to PROVE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT. The doubts the jury had are very well founded as they are the crux of any murder case. INTENT to kill.

The tape is reasonably explained as a by product of Kronk's moving the bag it makes more sense that the part of the tape that did retain some stickiness was originally on the OUTSIDE of the bag. The part retaining enough adhesive quality to later adhere to the bones when disturbed was in contact with the bag. If in contact with a decomposing body it would have lost all its ability to stick to anything. The fluids produced would have broken down the glue. Fluids exude from our natural body orifices. Mouth, nose, ( high bacterial growth there too) the very areas the tape was supposed to be in contact with. Another source for the heart sticker is it makes more sense that someone would mark the tape to tell it apart from other garbage bags by placing the heart sticker on the tape on the outside of the bag. I don't believe that the tape was used to kill her. I don't believe the chloroform came from anything other than Cindy generously spraying the trunk, car, Caylee's doll, other items from the car with a FeBreeze like product. Other people at the scene saw her doing this as well. I believe Casey was negligent in watching Caylee. Caylee got into the pool on her own. She could have stacked toys or buckets until she managed to crawl in. A 2 year old in Seminole Texas died earlier this year doing exactly that. Casey changed her clothes hid the evidence of the drowning and deposited her in the dump area. She may have gone back to bury her later thus borrowing the shovel but either removing all traces of any dirt from the scene or finding the area flooded and inaccessible she didn't bury her deep. She floated and Kronk saw her in August.

This was the time when the police dropped the ball BIG TIME. Failure to fully investigate the wooded area nearest to the Anthony home when Caylee was reported missing, they knew Casey was lying about Zanny, and they have a report from a utility worker who thinks he has seen human remains near the home. This is what could have made the case. Evidence of what she died of tells us accidental, or homicide, (I doubt natural at her young age.) Ruling that because the body was dumped and duct tape was found adhering to the skull that the cause of death was homicide is far fetched. Trying to tie it into the intent is where the prosecution lost the jury. The evidence of concealment is normally an admission of guilt but when you have a woman who lies like she did and lives the lifestyle she did then you have someone incapable of being blamed as that would require taking personal responsibility. Just when someone says never then something occurs to prove them wrong. Dr. G. has seen or heard of 1 case before where the body was dumped after an accident. I believe it has happened in Texas when someone hit someone in a car and fled the scene taking the person lodged in their windshield home with them and parking the car in the garage. The person hit was very drunk and stumbled in front of the car, if the individual who hit him had done the right thing and stopped it would have been an accident and no liability would have occurred. Instead the drunk guy dies still lodged in the windshield and they are caught. People do not always make rational decisions under stress and life and death situations. Do you think Casey able to make rational decisions? I think no one thinks her able to. Lie about it Yes we can all believe that.

Admittedly, this makes sense.

 

[Puzzler]

Both George and Cindy Anthony were impeached during the case. Fact - they lied. Cindy testified the last time she saw Caylee was the night before, June 15George testified the last time he saw Caylee was June 16 when she left with Casey. Three people in that house. With both Cindy and George being impeached, when was the last time Caylee was seen alive? Who was responsible for Caylee the last time she was seen alive?

The evidence was not lies or mistakes....it was the State only putting on evidence to support their theory.

The 84 chloroform hits was the Canadian guy who had a new computer program to sell to police. The State used that report because it supported their theory better. The State decided not to use the report prepared by the State's own crime guy which showed chloroform had only been searched one time and myspace had 84 hits.

In a nutshell, the State did what they usually accuse the defense of doing. The State found experts outside their own people who would testify to what supported their case the best. While the defense used the State's very own "employees" as well as FBI employees to counter most of the States evidence.

It would not have helped if Dr. Vass was a chemist. Because his research has not been verified by other scientists. So you have Dr. Vass with an unproven "method" get a extremely high reading of chloroform from "air" while scientists using proven methods cannot find enough chloroform in the lining to explain the air levels.

The State put the guy on to talk about the blow fly "leg" and the "gnats" to show a body was in the car. However, the defense shows that a blow fly "leg" is nothing if there was a dead body and it was all contained in the trash. You know that trash that was in a dumpster for while before it was picked up.

The smell in the car could or could not be true. Yes, some smelled it But those who smelled it had already been told there was a smell. So did they really smell it? Or did they expect to smell that horrible smell that the minute they even think of it, they smell it when there is nothing there? The police officers who did not know there was a smell of decomp in the car, did not smell it either in the car or in the garage. Yes, the smell should have been in the garage from Cindy opening the trunk.

The only "evidence" of the duct tape on the mouth was the "location" below the skull with the hair attached. However, the State themselves presented evidence that animals had scattered the bones. The defense presented testimony from Cindy and Lee that it was normal in that family to buy beloved pets in garbage bags with duct tape. It is a reasonable possibility when the animals were scattering the bones, the hair got stuck to the duct tape at that time. Despite the residue still being there to hold the hair to the tape, there was not even one little skin cell to show the tape was ever attached to Caylee's skin.

So while you believe everything the State presented. It is reasonable that the jury believed the "doubt" raised by the defense either through cross or testimony.

While I don't mind debate over chloroform and chloroform searches, or over who put the duct tape on and why, or over who put the body in the car and why, it does bug me when the body in the car and the duct tape over the face are presented as wimpy hypotheticals.

On the topic of decomp, I totally believe the testimony of the cadaver dogs. Two dogs, in my estimation, did not alert to human decomp when there was "nothing there." You'll also notice that JB did not have pics of Gerus and Bones on that who smelled what chart of his.

The duct tape was still stuck at both ends to the hair and it encircled the skull, which shows me that it went on when that hair and tape were dry. There were no skin cells because when the body rotted and the floods came through, the sticky backing rotted and there was NONE left on the tape, except for the previously formed dry bond with the hair. I think the state did not argue this point as effectively as they could have. They also did not address motive effectively, nor demonstrate the family dynamics and long, long history of KC's lies. All moot now, because the fat lady has sung.

At this point, we have been talking about the verdict far longer than the jury did. Which is a shame and a black mark on that jury. :cow:

 

[Velouria]

Everything you just typed was presented by the State. You appear to completely disregard any evidence or testimony presented by the Defense. It was NEVER up to the Defense to prove her innocent. It was up to the State to prove her guilty.

Yes, those are the "facts" the State presented. However, the defense through cross and the case they presented disputed the body in the trunk, the duct tape being the muder weapon, that Casey was the only person who it could be. That provided testimony to show that Casey's actions were not a result of Caylee's death. For her, for her family, that was normal behavior in that family.

The jury weighed the testimony and evidence according to the instructions they were given and determined that the STATE DID NOT PROVE ALL THOSE FACTS.

Hence, the jury brought the only verdict they could legally bring.

BBM

According to Juror #3, they did NOT follow the instructions. They expected the state to prove precisely how, why, when and where Caylee died, all of which NOT required to find the defendant guilty. And there's no way they reviewed all the evidence in only 10 hours, Ms. Ford admitted as much.

Had the jury been able to present a reasoned, substantial argument as to how they arrived at their verdict, then while disagreeing with it, I could respect it. But what I see is a group of individuals who bought into unsubstantiated accusations, considered opening statements as evidence, had difficulty evaluating circumstantial evidence, and did not fully comprehend the concept of reasonable doubt.