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

[JMCDAD]

I watched a show yesterday about the Scott Peterson case
It reminded me of the many similiarties of this case
His coldness, multiples lies, wanting to have fun and not be tied down by a wife and baby, inappropriate behavior after the "disappearance"
Just made me think how that jury got it right (after deliberating over a week I might add)
And that jury didn't seem to be concerned that they didn't know exactly how Laci died, but this jury said how could they convict without knowing how Caylee died

why? because the circumstantial evidence told the story
Just as it did in this case, this jury chose to ignore it all...

 

[Sistah Sleuth]

Casey Anthony: Cursed with Freedom

http://www.youtube.com/lancescurv#p/u/22/3ENGjhFNmx0

 

[raeann]

HUNDREDS of kids drown every summer and their parents are NEVER charged with anything. Just the other day, TWIN boys both drowned when no one was watching after them. Over the 4th of July weekend in our area at least four children drowned...two young teenagers in separate incidents at the same lake, a 7 year old at another lake and a 10 month old in a hot tub and NONE of those cases has even hinted at charging a parent with negligent homicide or manslaughter or child abuse. In fact, in the case of the 10 month old who could not even WALK, the parents claim the child removed their own life jacket and climbed up, over and into a hot tub during a "few seconds" of not being supervised. There is no evidence that it is the practice of the State of Florida to charge all parents of children who accidentally drown with manslaughter or a similar offense.
With no proof of cause or manner of death, the state's best chance at "Justice for Caylee" would have been to charge and convict on the actions that they had evidence of....they rolled the dice on a high risk bet and lost.

jmo

 

[SilkySifaka]

BINGO. Way too many unanswered questions to put a needle in Casey's arm. Coulda woulda shoulda?

Where does that leave us? No where except NG. I was even hesitant about manslaughter. Baez did a damm good job.

He did, and his job was to sow doubt and bring up alternative theories. It was not his burden to prove them, just to show they were a possibility. It was the states job to disprove them if they could.

I think they underestimated Jose Baez and overestimated the power of their own evidence that they were submitting. JA said it himself. "it just took the picture of the duct tape" Except it doesn't. There was no way to be sure how it ended up on her skull especially after it had been manipulated and in the elements for months. His belief in that picture brought them down.

Also in many cases jurors will cancel two opposing forensic scientists who come across as credible. As in they cancel them out since either could be right. rebuttal does not mean that it is credible or believed over the DT expert.

another point..the sniffer stuff which is NOT accepted science and it smacks of junk science when you first hear of it. Until it is peer reviewed and used far more times, and accepted in courts, it was a mistake to use it imo. It immediately set up a question about the accuracy of the Pros forensics..

 

[natsound]

Here is one thing I believe, after everything I have read/seen about Casey and family; if there exists a person who would cover up an accidental death, drowning or otherwise, with ridiculous tales and even try to make it look like a kidnapping/murder, this person would be Casey. She would never admit to neglecting Caylee long enough for her to drown or die in another way, mainly because she would not give Cindy the "satisfaction" of being right about Casey being a bad mother. And Casey kept stressing how Cindy said that about her, so it was clearly on her mind.

And once she was taken to jail and charged with Caylee's death, no one was going to listen to her if she suddely decided to "come clean", not to mention she couldn't admit it, seeing how and where Caylee would eventually be found. So she had to stick to her lies. And even if she had told LE in October that Caylee had drowned, this is all a big mistake, they would have told her, "too late, we'll let the jury decide what happened." So it wasn't like she was going to be freed if she "confessed".

So to me, it's not like she sat in jail for three years over an accident, as many have said. She really did not have a choice. At that point, even if Caylee's death was an accident, and I believe that is possible, no one was buying anything she was selling-and she had to try to distance herself from the way she left Caylee.

Bold by me... I hate to dredge this up again, but if Caylee's death was an accident, how do you account for the searches for "death" and "shovel", and how do you account for absolutely no outward fear or remorse at all after Caylee's death? And you say no one was buying what she was selling... I think her parents would have jumped on the accident bandwagon if she had said it was an accident.

 

[raeann]

Bold by me... I hate to dredge this up again, but if Caylee's death was an accident, how do you account for the searches for "death" and "shovel", and how do you account for absolutely no outward fear or remorse at all after Caylee's death? And you say no one was buying what she was selling... I think her parents would have jumped on the accident bandwagon if she had said it was an accident.

First of all, the whole searching for "shovel" thing was ridiculous....who knows whether or how that would have happened, but it was three months before any events in this case and so it was pretty much irrelevant anyway. I once did extensive searches for "poisonous house plants" on my computer. You wouldn't believe the kinds of odd links that I could have or might have clicked on during that search that popped up. However, the reason for my search was concern for my CAT.....although if someone I know got a severe case of food poisoning three months later, it might look bad for me if someone WANTED to make it appear that way.

jmo

 

[GhostCrab]

The NYTimes article is misleading. Mr. Bradley is being disingenuous. His flawed software made things worse for the prosecution as the discrepancy was exploited by the defense as they presented their case and in their closing statements.

I can only hope that she would sue the state for violating her civil rights. That would force her to testify.

Not only would she lose the case, but mostly likely she would perjure herself and set herself up for felony convictions.

The article is misleading? He's being disingenuous? Talk about sitting on your fingers....

 

[dunlurken]

Bold by me... I hate to dredge this up again, but if Caylee's death was an accident, how do you account for the searches for "death" and "shovel", and how do you account for absolutely no outward fear or remorse at all after Caylee's death? And you say no one was buying what she was selling... I think her parents would have jumped on the accident bandwagon if she had said it was an accident.

Heaven forbid........... take me away. I searched for shovel the other day. I have also researched death when my mother was dieing. I have never researched neck breaking or chloform, but heaven help me if I do and a family member goes missing.

 

[natsound]

Heaven forbid........... take me away. I searched for shovel the other day. I have also researched death when my mother was dieing. I have never researched neck breaking or chloform, but heaven help me if I do and a family member goes missing.

I understand that, but for those searches to come up on a computer when a little girl died, and her mother doesn't care at all, and everyone is trying to determine if the girl was murdered or if it was an accident.. these searches fit in with a murder scenario. She had murder on her mind.

Just out of curiosity... why did you search for shovel?

 

[natsound]

First of all, the whole searching for "shovel" thing was ridiculous....who knows whether or how that would have happened, but it was three months before any events in this case and so it was pretty much irrelevant anyway. I once did extensive searches for "poisonous house plants" on my computer. You wouldn't believe the kinds of odd links that I could have or might have clicked on during that search that popped up. However, the reason for my search was concern for my CAT.....although if someone I know got a severe case of food poisoning three months later, it might look bad for me if someone WANTED to make it appear that way.

jmo

What? Irrelevant? All of the suspect searches took place in March. Are you saying all of those searches are irrelevant?

 

[dunlurken]

I understand that, but for those searches to come up on a computer when a little girl died, and her mother doesn't care at all, and everyone is trying to determine if the girl was murdered or if it was an accident.. these searches fit in with a murder scenario. She had murder on her mind.

Just out of curiosity... why did you search for shovel?

We need a new one? So I researched the best prices, etc.

 

[JMCDAD]

Heaven forbid........... take me away. I searched for shovel the other day. I have also researched death when my mother was dieing. I have never researched neck breaking or chloform, but heaven help me if I do and a family member goes missing.

well if family member goes missing and you lie about it and everything surrounding it, then you go party and have a good time, and a cadavor dog hits on you car, and your family member is found with duct tape on her face near your house etc etc etc

you see circumstantial evidence needs to be looked at in its entirety, not individually

 

[natsound]

We need a new one? So I researched the best prices, etc.

Nothing wrong with that. I can see going to a shopping comparison place to search for shovel prices. But I don't know what a standard google search would pull up. It seems to me that KC had murder on her mind, as I stated before.

 

[HatesSociopaths]

The short answer is "no". The long answer is who saw Caylee drowned in the pool?

Zanny?

:doh:

 

[dunlurken]

Zanny?

:doh:

Now, that gave me a chuckle. Thanks. :floorlaugh:

My point is still this. Too many unanswered questions to put a needle in someone's arm.

 

[raeann]

I am saying a search for shovel in March is irrelevant to a case where there was no evidence that a shovel had anything to do with the case at all. They tracked down a person who supposedly remembered that Casey borrowed a shovel at some time...with no evidence that she had ever touched that item nor that the item had touched anything relevant to the case either. There were probably hundreds of other searches before and after for odd things just like on every other persons computer.

jmo

 

[dunlurken]

well if family member goes missing and you lie about it and everything surrounding it, then you go party and have a good time, and a cadavor dog hits on you car, and your family member is found with duct tape on her face near your house etc etc etc

you see circumstantial evidence needs to be looked at in its entirety, not individually

The cadaver dog also hit in the playhouse and various other places in the backyard. The point is moot, IMO.

 

[natsound]

I am saying a search for shovel in March is irrelevant to a case where there was no evidence that a shovel had anything to do with the case at all. They tracked down a person who supposedly remembered that Casey borrowed a shovel at some time...with no evidence that she had ever touched that item nor that the item had touched anything relevant to the case either. There were probably hundreds of other searches before and after for odd things just like on every other persons computer.

jmo

What?? The search for shovel in March is absolutely not irrelevant in a case where a young girl died and was found thrown in the woods, and her mother just happened to back into the driveway and borrow a shovel from a neighbor two days later. What do you mean there was no evidence she never touched that item? Are you talking about KC? She touched it. Or are you talking about Caylee? Are you expecting some sort of DNA on every item that was part and parcel to the crime? You aren't going to get it!

 

[dunlurken]

Here's the other thing. If us as posters are so smart and know what happened, why didn't prosecution?

 

[JMCDAD]

I am saying a search for shovel in March is irrelevant to a case where there was no evidence that a shovel had anything to do with the case at all. They tracked down a person who supposedly remembered that Casey borrowed a shovel at some time...with no evidence that she had ever touched that item nor that the item had touched anything relevant to the case either. There were probably hundreds of other searches before and after for odd things just like on every other persons computer.

jmo

If I remember correctly, most if not all of the hits were found in the deleted items folder, yet there was little if anyting else deleted , there was searches on the computer from years before. So the question is not only how these items fit into the case but why were they deleted where its not the practice in that household to delete items on a regular basis.
Also if you remember it was JB contention that someone else other than Casey did those searches and when Cindy came up and said was her then was proven to be lying about it JB changed it to say of course it was Casey, but it was just curiosity over her boyfirend 's picture of the chloroform on his myspace. The defense was like an extension of Casey just throw lies out there and confuse, and they got the perfect jury that was not willing or able to mentally/intellectually handle it.