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

[RR0004]

Since the birth of internet in the early 90's and the long-ago days of Mosaic, I've posted online against many high-profile and media influenced cases. Off the top of my head I recall: the Menendez brothers murder case (their parents), the infamous Little Rascals day-care sexual-abuse case, OJ's murder case (Nicole Simpson, Ron Goldman), Richard Jewell and the Olympic park bombing case, the Robert Halsey child sexual-abuse case, Ray Carruth for the murder of his pregnant girlfriend (Cherica Adams), the Baby Sabrina kidnapping case (The Aisenbergs), the Patrick Figuered and Sonja Hill child sexual-abuse case, the Jon Benet murder case (The Ramseys), the Nancy Smith and Joseph Allen child sexual-abuse case, Sandra Murphy and Rick Tabish in the Ted Binion murder case, Gabriel Ferris in the Cheryl Murphy murder case, the Darlie Routier murder case (her children), Mark Unger for the murder of his wife (Florence Unger), Cynthia Sommer for the murder of her husband (Todd Sommer), Cynthia George for conspiracy to commit murder (Jeffrey Zach), Gary Condit in the Chandra Levy case, Scott Hornoff for the murder of his mistress (Victoria Cushman), Andrea Yates for drowning her children, Michael Peterson for the murder of his wife (Kathleen Peterson), David Westerfield for the murder of Danielle Van Dam, Robert Blake for the murder of his girlfriend (Bonnie Lee Bakely), Joran van der Sloot in the Natalee Holloway case, Dr. Dirk Greineder for the murder of his wife (Mabel Greineder), Deanna Laney for stoning her children to death, Richard Ricci in the Elizabeth Smart case (alleged murder found to be a fruitcake kidnapping), Rabbi Fred Neulander for the murder of his wife (Carol Neulander), Louise Woodward in the Au Pair murder case (Matthew Eappen), John Mason in the runaway bride case (Jennifer Wilbanks), Jayson Williams for murder two in the shotgun killing of Gus Cristoffi, the Madeline McCann case (the McCanns), Phil Spector in the murder two case of Lana Clarkson, and Reade Seligman, Collin Finnerty and David Evans in the Duke lacrosse rape case.

But a few pre-internet cases that immediately come to mind are: Dr. Jeffrey MacDonald for the murder of his wife and children -- the oldest and number one case on my list of likely wrongful convictions, Claus Von Bulow for the attempted murder of his wife (Sunny von Bulow), the Prescott Ontario ritualized sexual-abuse cases (117 people), Bambi Bambenek's murder case (Christine Schultz), the Fells Acre child sexual-abuse case, T. Cullen Davis for the murder of his stepdaughter (Andrea Wilborn), and the infamous McMartin pre-school ritualized sexual-abuse case.

In all of the above cases, I would not have indicted any of those who were accused in the media but never been charged.

From the above cases that went to trial, those where I would have voted for a conviction are:

The Menendez brothers (unlike the jury, I would have convicted them of murder one in the first trial)

OJ’s murder trial

Rae Carruth (unlike the jury's murder two conviction, I would have voted for murder one)

T. Cullen Davis

David Westerfield

Dr. Dirk Greineder

Rabbi Fred Neulander

Jayson Williams (Unlike the jury, I would have voted for murder two in his first trial. His re-trial still is in waiting.)

Phil Spector (for murder two in his first trial)

Though I would not have convicted Andrea Yates or Deanna Laney, I would have voted to send them to a mental institution.

Now ya see, I never thought they would convict OJ....that is based on the what was presented during the trial.

Thanks...I'm off to do some reading.

PS- the Rabbi...too easy...open and shut IMO.

 

[The Eunice Burns]

Wudge, thank you for posting that long list. That was a lot of typing. OT---As soon as OJ got his change of venue, I knew he would not be convicted. But, he should have been. Sorry mods!

 

[Brini]

I thought this was cleared up after I posted my hypo -- Mother out walking with her young daughter and two young nieces. However, if you do not recall the hypo, please repost to the jury instruction thread, and the mods can erase your post and mine here.

No, because we are talking about KC's case, specifically, now.

 

[marspiter]

OT,

Yeah I would have voted for a conviction in the OJ trial but I knew they wouldn't convict him. To many powerful lawyers swaying the scales of justice on that one, but isn't karma grand. :behindbar

 

[Balthazar]

No, because we are talking about KC's case, specifically, now.

What, in your opinion, is wrong with Wudge's hypo explaining what premeditation is? I think it's a very clear explanation for the layman. In Casey's case, we have failed to find anything that really indicates clear premeditation - and we are certainly trying. But without premeditation there can be no Murder 1 conviction. If you think there is premeditation, why don't you explain your Casey premeditation theory here and we'll discuss it. None of us are opposed to changing our minds if someone can provide strong evidence of premeditation in Casey's case.

Think of it this way, in Scott Peterson's case, he told his girlfriend that he was a widower spending his first Christmas alone 15 days before he killed Laci. That's definitely premeditation. Can you find or do you know of something similar to that in Casey's case?

 

[marspiter]

No, because we are talking about KC's case, specifically, now.

Actually no it wasn't cleared up. It was basically a clever way of not really answering by use of misdirection. The question has been moved to the proper thread though.

 

[Brini]

Actually you are mistaken about the results of the SODDI thread. We determined that an absence of evidence that there might be SOD DOES NOT PROVE that there wasn't SOD. All it proves, as far as we can tell, is that the police did not investigate other potential suspects such as the pedophile with the similar MO who lived within 4 miles of Caylee - I'm sure you remember the "Duct Tape on the 4 year old victim's mouth" pedophile we discovered. I can only hope that police have ruled him out because if they haven't the defense will likely take advantage of that in court. However, SOD is off topic here as we are examing the evidence to determine Casey's level of guilt and the likely verdict in this case. So excuse me for digressing but I wanted to set the record straight on the SODDI thread.

Actually we DID eliminate the possibility of a SOD.

1) KC had custody of Caylee.
2) No one else had custody of Caylee at any time, except the As. And, Caylee did not go missing, while in care of the As.
3) After KC left the house on the 15th or 16th, Caylee was never seen again.
4) According to LE, Caylee was likely killed around the 15th or 16th.
5) Given that KC had custody at all times, how did said SOD get Caylee away from KC?
6) If Caylee was forcibly taken by a SOD, why did KC refuse to report the crime, and also mislead the police investigation of the crime?
7) If KC carelessly left Caylee in a position to be taken by a SOD, not forcibly, how did KC's sticker get on the tapes over Caylee's mouth and nose?
8) If KC carelessly left Caylee in a position to be taken by a SOD, how did KC know where the baby's body was left? (KC's anxiety attack)
9) If KC knows a criminal took Caylee, why is she sitting in jail, taking the rap for said criminal?

Bottom line- if somebody REALLY took the baby, KC would run to LE and spill her guts. She CERTAINLY wouldn't cover for a pedo who stole Caylee. Or, if she would, she's worse than we know.

And, that is more ammo for the "Guilty" side of the issue.

 

[marspiter]

What, in your opinion, is wrong with Wudge's hypo explaining what premeditation is? I think it's a very clear explanation for the layman. In Casey's case, we have failed to find anything that really indicates clear premeditation - and we are certainly trying. But without premeditation there can be no Murder 1 conviction. If you think there is premeditation, why don't you explain your Casey premeditation theory here and we'll discuss it. None of us are opposed to changing our minds if someone can provide strong evidence of premeditation in Casey's case.

Think of it this way, in Scott Peterson's case, he told his girlfriend that he was a widower spending his first Christmas alone 15 days before he killed Laci. That's definitely premeditation. Can you find or do you know of something similar to that in Casey's case?

Actually no it didn't answer what was being discussed as Wudge posted the hypo in response to me saying his 4 elements were not the elements listed in the jury instructions of what must be proven by the prosecution in a murder 1 case in accordance with Florida statute 782.04(1)(a). The question has once again been posed for an actual answer in the proper thread (jury instructions).

edit: Wudge did give his answer in the other thread however, and if I may say agreed that the 3 elements I listed are the only ones listed in the general jury instructions for Florida and not his 4.

 

[marspiter]

According to Florida Standard Criminal Jury Instruction 7.1 (2003)

“Killing with premeditation” is killing after consciously deciding to do so. The
decision must be present in the mind at the time of the killing. The law does not fix the
exact period of time that must pass between the formation of the premeditated intent to
kill and the killing. The period of time must be long enough to allow reflection by the
defendant. The premeditated intent to kill must be formed before the killing.
The question of premeditation is a question of fact to be determined by you from
the evidence. It will be sufficient proof of premeditation if the circumstances of the
killing and the conduct of the accused convince you beyond a reasonable doubt of the
existence of premeditation at the time of the killing.
If a person has a premeditated design to kill one person and in attempting to kill
that person actually kills another person, the killing is premeditated.

That is all premeditation is. It is not some long drawn out plan. Also the jury is allowed to make a reasonable conclusion from the evidence that there was premeditation. There does not in effect need to be 100% irrefutable proof of premeditation.

 

[Brini]

Now ya see, I never thought they would convict OJ....that is based on the what was presented during the trial.

Thanks...I'm off to do some reading.

PS- the Rabbi...too easy...open and shut IMO.

It was the prosecution's fault. AND, Judge Ito's

 

[Brini]

What, in your opinion, is wrong with Wudge's hypo explaining what premeditation is? I think it's a very clear explanation for the layman. In Casey's case, we have failed to find anything that really indicates clear premeditation - and we are certainly trying. But without premeditation there can be no Murder 1 conviction. If you think there is premeditation, why don't you explain your Casey premeditation theory here and we'll discuss it. None of us are opposed to changing our minds if someone can provide strong evidence of premeditation in Casey's case.

Think of it this way, in Scott Peterson's case, he told his girlfriend that he was a widower spending his first Christmas alone 15 days before he killed Laci. That's definitely premeditation. Can you find or do you know of something similar to that in Casey's case?

Nothing's wrong with W's example. It just doesn't apply to KC.

No, I will not RE-explain my reasons for concluding premeditation. We have all already posted on that, Princess. Please go back and read.

 

[Jolynna]

Agreed, but in Scott Peterson's case, he was telling his girlfriend that he was a widower and would be spending his first Christmas alone 15 days before Laci disappeared. That is definitely premeditation.

In Casey's case, we are having trouble determining if there is any premeditaton at all. If premeditation doesn't exist, then she will not be found guilty of Murder 1 as that is a requirement for a Murder 1 conviction.

Which brings us back to the duct tape.

Whether or not KC had been planning Caylee's murder for months or she was overcome with frustration and rage, KC had time to rethink her actions when she tore off the second layer of tape.

I don't see taping after death as an option. If there is a reason to do it, it would be regularly happening. But, I don't think it's ever been done by a parent.

Nobody can prove the tape was what killed Caylee. But, we can all be sure the tape would have killed her if something else didn't. We can also be sure that Dr. G determined Caylee's death was not an accident or from natural causes.

 

[Brini]

And the cop's who took the suspect's blood away from the station dirtying up the chain of custody.

Not to mention the cops who LOST the figging KNIFE!

MF (who was only on the case for 20 minutes) said the weapon was a Swiss Army knife. It was bloody, and sitting beside its box on the edge of the master bathtub.

And, some cop or crime tech LOST it.

That's why we never heard of it, again.

 

[Patty G]

Please continue here: [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=86507"]"G (Guilty)" vs "NG (Not Guilty)" Where do you stand? #2 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]