"G (Guilty)" vs "NG (Not Guilty)" Where do you stand?

[Wudge]

Well, fluids begin to leak right away. Drool comes out. If there's mucus in the nose, it comes out.

SNIP

When experts testify, this is exactly what the defense wants to hear. Because it supports the use of tape to control post-death leakage.

 

[Tuffy]

Here's something that may be really hard to read:

As of this moment right now, and until a jury finds otherwise: she is NOT GUILTY on all charges. Period. This is how our justice system works, and those rights are for everyone, from the most vile of people to the most saintly.

There, I said it . . . let the thrashing begin! I'm a big girl, I can take it. . . . I hope . . .

It's not hard for me to read. I understand that legally she (along with any other defendant) is considered not guilty until a verdict is handed down in our system of justice.

I do understand your point here. And, I wouldn't trash you for pointing this out.

This thread is not asking that question though. This thread is asking for our opinions on the guilt of this defendant. In the OP it is asked, if we think she did it.

 

[Tuffy]

When experts testify, this is exactly what the defense wants to hear. Because it supports the use of tape to control post-death leakage.

Personally, an expert testifying that the defendant taped the nose and mouth shut post-death doesn't sway me to a "not guilty" vote. I don't think they are going to want to have the jury visualizing the defendant handling the decomposing body, in addition to driving around with it for days.

 

[Bobbisangel]

Honey, that's just one opinion.

You and I both know that most murderers (most CRIMINALS, in fact) are convicted on circumstantial evidence. (Scott Peterson comes to mind) And, in this case, we have a mountain of it.

All that's needed here is a nice, average jury.

Don't forget "common sense!" The jury has to have lots of common sense.

By the way Wudge.....Caylee's body wasn't it the trunk of Casey's car for 11 days. It was in there between 2-3 days.

 

[Patty G]

Please move the discussion of "duct" tape out of this thread and into the thread already started here:


[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=85495"]Autopsy Report - UCF Osteological Analysis-Duct Tape Info - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]


We have at least 6 more months before the trial begins and if we start discussing anything and everything in all the threads, it will make it harder to search for things when the trial does begin. Thanks.

 

[Wudge]

Personally, an expert testifying that the defendant taped the nose and mouth shut post-death doesn't sway me to a "not guilty" vote. I don't think they are going to want to have the jury visualizing the defendant handling the decomposing body, in addition to driving around with it for days.

Still, using tape to control post-death leakage is not evidence of premeditation. Moreover, driving around for days with a body in the truck is evidence that works against premeditation.

 

[doogiesgirl]

Waters are clear:

KC had custody of Caylee
KC had custody of the car
KC refused to report Caylee missing
Two dogs from two counties hit on the car
Decomp in the car
KC lied and misled LE from the first.

Nothing you've listed reliably supports the state's murder one charge (premeditated murder) much less is dispositive of murder one.


(Friend of those who have no friend. ......... Boston Blackie)

Wudge---you've been watching too many CA clips!! Turn them off as your response to Brini's post reminds me of something that CA would say. Sorry but to me, Brini's list does support the state's case for murder one.

:cow:

 

[Brini]

Here's something that may be really hard to read:

As of this moment right now, and until a jury finds otherwise: she is NOT GUILTY on all charges. Period. This is how our justice system works, and those rights are for everyone, from the most vile of people to the most saintly.

There, I said it . . . let the thrashing begin! I'm a big girl, I can take it. . . . I hope . . .

No thrashing. Besides, Countzero and I have eaten the coconut pies I had planned to throw.

Just a gentle reminder that "innocent until proven guilty" applies ONLY to the courts. Personal opinion is not bound by it. XOXO

 

[Brini]

Still, using tape to control post-death leakage is not evidence of premeditation. Moreover, driving around for days with a body in the truck is evidence that works against premeditation.

My guess is that the jury won't follow that particular logic.

 

[Brini]

When experts testify, this is exactly what the defense wants to hear. Because it supports the use of tape to control post-death leakage.

Nobody uses tape to suppress post-death leakages. The fluid volume could slough the tape right off. They bag the body.

Few people carry duct tape in their cars.

 

[Brini]

Thanks for finding the link. I didn't have the mental energy to go looking for it ..... again.

I have no patience for JB much less any faith in the man. He wouldn't last 2 nano seconds in my presence before being cut to shreds without him knowing it. I viewed BSheaffers video awhile ago and the man is point on about him and ALyons taking over first chair now. JB may not even get second chair ..... can't say I will cry over that one.

I told you folks. JB is getting the tall chair with the detachable food tray, at the end of the table.

 

[Jolynna]

Still, using tape to control post-death leakage is not evidence of premeditation. Moreover, driving around for days with a body in the truck is evidence that works against premeditation.

As another poster pointed out, a bag would keep fluid from getting on anything.

There are no signs KC did anything to pretty Caylee up. Caylee was put into a trash bag wearing a T-shirt (with a mean quote...considering the circumstances) and pull-ups. Her shorts may or may not have been on her body.

There is just no point to duct taping half of Caylee's face up like a mummy after death.

Absolutely deliberate murder. No question in my mind.

IMO

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

Is this a common thing ~ to put tape over all the orifices on a dead body to prevent "leakage" of the decomp fluids? I have never heard of it before and am sure it would never occur to me to do this preventative maintenance on someone I had just murdered. Are there a lot (or any) cases that we are aware of when it had been done before? Or is this just a theory to help rationalize the presence of the duct tape that we have just kinda run with?

 

[Muzikman]

Still, using tape to control post-death leakage is not evidence of premeditation. Moreover, driving around for days with a body in the truck is evidence that works against premeditation.

I disagree. Premeditation can legally be just minutes, as I'm sure you know. She didn't necessarily have to have a plan for disposal for it to be premeditated.


>>>Premeditation is planning, plotting or deliberating before doing something. For example, murder by poisoning automatically includes an element of premeditation. Premeditation is an element in first degree murder and shows the element of intent necessary to convict of the crime.

The amount of time necessary between the planning and the act to prove premeditation is judged on a case by case basis.

Murder in the first degree consists of an intentional, deliberate and premeditated killing, which means that the killing is done after a period of time for prior consideration. The duration of that period cannot be arbitrarily fixed. The time in which to form a deliberate and premeditated design varies as the minds and temperaments of people differ, and according to the circumstances in which they may be placed.<<<
http://definitions.uslegal.com/p/premeditation/

 

[Nedthan Johns]

Not Guilty. The presumption of innocence prevails. Moreover, assuming the body is Caylee, without a cause of death or mechanics of death, we know of no new evidence that would support either manslaughter or premeditated murder.

Oh Wudge.... You seem to forget the Westerfield case don't you? No cause of death in that one, less forensic evidence in that case as well, but guess what? I conviction none the less. Casey Anthony will be found guilty in a court of law. NO DOUBT ABOUT THAT. Thanks

 

[Wudge]

I disagree. Premeditation can legally be just minutes, as I'm sure you know. She didn't necessarily have to have a plan for disposal for it to be premeditated.


>>>Premeditation is planning, plotting or deliberating before doing something. For example, murder by poisoning automatically includes an element of premeditation. Premeditation is an element in first degree murder and shows the element of intent necessary to convict of the crime.

The amount of time necessary between the planning and the act to prove premeditation is judged on a case by case basis.

Murder in the first degree consists of an intentional, deliberate and premeditated killing, which means that the killing is done after a period of time for prior consideration. The duration of that period cannot be arbitrarily fixed. The time in which to form a deliberate and premeditated design varies as the minds and temperaments of people differ, and according to the circumstances in which they may be placed.<<<
http://definitions.uslegal.com/p/premeditation/

I agree with the points contained in your post. However, my point was different.

My point was and remains that -- no matter how long it might ltake to form premeditation -- the simple act of driving around for days with a dead body in your car is not evidence that supports premeditation; rather, it works strongly against it.

HTH

 

[Marina2]

I agree with the points contained in your post. However, my point was different.

My point was and remains that -- no matter how long it might ltake to form premeditation -- the simple act of driving around for days with a dead body in your car is not evidence that supports premeditation; rather, it works strongly against it.

HTH

I understand why it isn't evidence of premeditation. She may have done that even if it was an accident. What isn't so clear to me is how it works strongly against it. Intent to murder can be formed in seconds but a plan for disposal of the body can take much longer. I'm not arguing your point, just trying to understand the reasoning behind it.

 

[Muzikman]

I agree with the points contained in your post. However, my point was different.

My point was and remains that -- no matter how long it might ltake to form premeditation -- the simple act of driving around for days with a dead body in your car is not evidence that supports premeditation; rather, it works strongly against it.

HTH

Wudge, you're going to have to explain your thought process, because I don't see how driving around with with a body in the car for a couple days (because she didn't think ahead enough for a good disposal plan - only disposed of it where she did because she almost got caught, probably) "works strongly against premeditation".

Just doesn't compute in my mind.

 

[Wudge]

Wudge, you're going to have to explain your thought process, because I don't see how driving around with with a body in the car for a couple days (because she didn't think ahead enough for a good disposal plan - only disposed of it where she did because she almost got caught, probably) "works strongly against premeditation".

Just doesn't compute in my mind.

From the evidence available in the public domain (which is almost assusedly most everything) we have learned of numerous web searches that Casey allegedly made far ahead of when Caylee was last seen alive. Many posters in crime forums and legal analysts speak to these web searches as allegedly being state of mind evidence that establishes Casey was considering options for killing (murdering) Caylee long before she was last seen alive. If true, this would support the planning and deliberation elements that a charge of murder one requires be proved.

Given that many of these searches took place far ahead (weeks, months) of when Caylee was last seen alive demonstrates the State should not be expected to claim that the alleged planning and deliberation was sudden; i.e., just seconds, minutes or even hours beforehand. And if the planning and deliberation is alleged by prosecutors to have been far ahead of time, it does not compute that body disposable would never have been thought about, which is what driving around for days with a body in the trunk of your car would strongly suggest.

 

[Wudge]

I understand why it isn't evidence of premeditation. She may have done that even if it was an accident. What isn't so clear to me is how it works strongly against it. Intent to murder can be formed in seconds but a plan for disposal of the body can take much longer. I'm not arguing your point, just trying to understand the reasoning behind it.

Premeditation "can" be formed in a short period of time. However, the key thing is for prosecutors to produce reliable evidence that proves this is true.

The alleged evidence (such as computer searches) that most posters usually to refer to as evidence of premeditation were not made just seconds or minutes before Caylee was last seen alive.