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

[PoppyH]

I say Guilty of Premeditated, I think she would have "offed" her parents too, given the chance, this gal is pure evil, she was looking for a way to take Caylees life and she succeded, no ones gonna sit in jail over an accident, anyone that I know of would have called 911, immediatly on discovering that thier child had drowned if that would have been the case, tape around the head and mouth area, and stuffed in a garbage bag and tossed in the woods says alot to me, I hope the jury feels the same this is all JMO

 

[kathyn2]

Killing a child while commiting aggravated child abuse (ie, drugging a child) is first degree murder in FL. NOT 2nd degree.

2nd degree. I believe it was 2nd degree b/c she committed the offense while she was engaging in aggravated child abuse (whether that be drugging her or whatever).

 

[impatientredhead]

This post really got me thinking. In this scenario, the mother should be found not guilty, even though her behavior afterward was baffling. Of course, the premise is that the mother did not, in fact, contribute in any way to the death.

My question: Can a juror, when considering reasonable doubt, take into account the actions of the accused when making a determination? If I believe KC's actions afterward indicate an attempt to cover up a crime, can I allow that to affect my verdict? In KC's case, the thing that makes me sure it wasn't an accident is her behavior. I am curious if anything other than proven evidence can be considered, having never sat on a jury before.

Not responding after an accident, especially one involving a minor in your care is a crime. You have a duty to provide a reasonable standard of care, a reasonable response to your child falling out of a tree is to call an ambulance. The reasonable response to your child being kidnapped is to call the police. You are legally responsible to provide the appropriate care for the situation.

The only reason not call for help following an accident is because the cause of the accident is either illegal in itself, or the child has been dead for so long you clearly weren't caring for him or her. Not it was my fault for not closing the gate, not it was my fault I left the ladder up, not it was my fault I never should have turned my back, but it was my fault I was too high to notice she wasn't napping and drown three hours ago.

 

[tragco]

Not responding after an accident, especially one involving a minor in your care is a crime. You have a duty to provide a reasonable standard of care, a reasonable response to your child falling out of a tree is to call an ambulance. The reasonable response to your child being kidnapped is to call the police. You are legally responsible to provide the appropriate care for the situation.

The only reason not call for help following an accident is because the cause of the accident is either illegal in itself, or the child has been dead for so long you clearly weren't caring for him or her. Not it was my fault for not closing the gate, not it was my fault I left the ladder up, not it was my fault I never should have turned my back, but it was my fault I was too high to notice she wasn't napping and drown three hours ago.

TY! But as JWG points out, the crime of not responding to an accident does not allow for a murder 1 premeditated verdict. I agree that the only reason not to respond or call for help indicates KC could have cared less what happened to Caylee, and constitutes negligence. I voted murder 1 because I am certain that KC would not have acted the way she did unless she premeditated the act. HOWEVER, if a judge instructed me that I could not view her actions after the fact as pertinent to the case, it would change my verdict.

 

[impatientredhead]

TY! But as JWG points out, the crime of not responding to an accident does not allow for a murder 1 premeditated verdict. I agree that the only reason not to respond or call for help indicates KC could have cared less what happened to Caylee, and constitutes negligence. I voted murder 1 because I am certain that KC would not have acted the way she did unless she premeditated the act. HOWEVER, if a judge instructed me that I could not view her actions after the fact as pertinent to the case, it would change my verdict.

Right, I probably could have quoted better, I was really responding more to the original scenario not being a crime. That chucking your kid in the woods after falling out of a tree isn't a crime. It is and depending on the circumstance you can get to a pretty serious felony pretty quickly. All of the life without parole ones involve intent on some level, intending to harm, intending to kill, intending to commit another crime and death results.

 

[JWG]

Right, I probably could have quoted better, I was really responding more to the original scenario not being a crime. That chucking your kid in the woods after falling out of a tree isn't a crime. It is and depending on the circumstance you can get to a pretty serious felony pretty quickly. All of the life without parole ones involve intent on some level, intending to harm, intending to kill, intending to commit another crime and death results.

Just to be clear myself, I asked

what crime was committed and if there was a crime, what should the sentence be?

not because I believe "the answer is there was no crime", but because I am hopeful there was a significant enough crime to keep her behind bars a very long time.

I'd just like to know what the charges and penalties would be.

 

[impatientredhead]

Just to be clear myself, I asked

not because I believe "the answer is there was no crime", but because I am hopeful there was a significant enough crime to keep her behind bars a very long time.

I'd just like to know what the charges and penalties would be.

They are misdemeanor charges from what I can find if there is no way to show intent to harm or reckless behavior that would lead any rational person to assume someone could be harmed.

The closest case I can find is Debra Loreth in Okahumpka, in Lake County who put her 83 year old mother in garbage bags and dumped her on the side of the road while cashing mom's retirement checks illegally.

http://www.ocala.com/article/20071128/NEWS/211280322/1001/NEWS01&MaxW=270&MaxH=200

She got probation via a public defender.

http://lakecountyclerk.org/online_court_records_detail.asp?case_id=48019578

 

[JBean]

Suppose a child climbs a tree, falls, breaks his neck, and dies.

Mother comes out and finds dead child. Picks him up and stuffs him in a garbage bag. Drives around with body a few days, then stops by side of road and tosses bag into woods. Does not report it to police.

One month later, police question mother on why child is missing. In this case, she tells them she found her dead son by a tree, bagged him, drove around with him in trunk and tossed him in the woods. She leads police to body. Autopsy confirms cause of death.

Putting your feelings for the mother aside (none of us would befriend her on Facebook, I hope)...what crime was committed and if there was a crime, what should the sentence be?

And don't get me wrong here...I am in the anger phase of grief on this and I absolutely hate Casey. I think she is a horrible waste of human flesh. But I am not convinced at all that an accident did not occur and she had about the most inappropriate reaction one could have.

well this i my point exactly. I think there was indeed a crime..I just dont know what the crime is/was based on the evidence to date. but hopefully it will come clear in court. I may have my personal speculation and bias, but that doesn't amount to a hill of beans at this point. Trying to determine the appropriate charges and ultimate verdict is out of my reach right now.

 

[boogiebear]

I think it was first degree murder, but if Caylee did die during KC drugging her and it was an accident, that is Capital Murder. If you cause the death of someone during the commission of a felony(drugging a person), then it is capital murder. Example if you rob a bank, and a woman has a heart attack, dying from it, then you are guilty of capital murder. Either way this does not bode well for KC.

 

[FightTheOstrich]

1st degree and I hope she receives 3rd degree burns from her punishment.

 

[stagehand]

At this point in time now that the body has been found, and the medical examiner's findings state the cause of death is indeterminable, as well as stating she does not expect any toxicology to provide any additional light on the cause of death, any discussion about "drugging" is immaterial. It can't be proven so it's pointless.

There is also no history of child abuse, I guess people can speculate on that and perhaps channel their anger issues that way but it has no bearing because it also cannot be proven.

If we stick with what can actually be proven, behavior, car with the aura of death on it, body found close to the residence, and while we don't yet but assuming evidence was found at the scene linking back to Casey, she will almost certainly be found responsible for the crime.

Whether or not it was premeditated, based on what we know now and what can be proven, it's still a little iffy without drawing conclusions. I think the duct tape is going to play a major role there.

As far as the kidnapping theory, based on the evidence I stated above I think that will be blown out of the water. If indeed it was a accident, she certainly is making a critical mistake in playing kidnapping card and might actually sway a jury to the premeditated conclusion.

And what do I hope for? I hope that Casey get the most viperous defense possible. For the sole reason that as an American I know there is nothing more important than the Constitution and the rights it affords to all citizens.

I also hope that the prosecution presents the very best case possible, because that is their job and what they are being paid to do.

 

[Pink Panther]

I voted a while back but always enjoy looking in here. I like to see the poll results. They comfort me.

 

[mahmoo]

There, there, now, JWG. :blowkiss: Take a deep, relaxing breath... You are so innately organized that I fear you're trying to plot out a swift progression through all the stages of grief in your usual precise, orderly manner. It doesn't work that way. Grief is messy. It's slow and lazy. It's sneaky. Phases can stick to you like flypaper while you're trying to shove your way through the next one.

Step back, celebrate life, and let grief take care of itself, don't try to take care of it. You can't and if you try, it will make you crazy. From now until after the final verdict is read, there's nothing for you to worry about. And depending upon the verdict, there may never be anything to worry about.

That's the best post I've read throughout this whole case......thank you Friday.....thank you :blowkiss:.

 

[jujube]

At this point in time now that the body has been found, and the medical examiner's findings state the cause of death is indeterminable, as well as stating she does not expect any toxicology to provide any additional light on the cause of death, any discussion about "drugging" is immaterial. It can't be proven so it's pointless.

There is also no history of child abuse, I guess people can speculate on that and perhaps channel their anger issues that way but it has no bearing because it also cannot be proven.

If we stick with what can actually be proven, behavior, car with the aura of death on it, body found close to the residence, and while we don't yet but assuming evidence was found at the scene linking back to Casey, she will almost certainly be found responsible for the crime.

As far as the kidnapping theory, based on the evidence I stated above I think that will be blown out of the water. If indeed it was a accident, she certainly is making a critical mistake in playing kidnapping card and might actually sway a jury to the premeditated conclusion.

.

~snipped~

1. Drugs may come into play as far as previous behavior if any of Casey's friends give evidence that she drugged Caylee in the past. They may not prove this led to her murder but it's not pointless.

2.We haven't heard of any history of child abuse but then we don't know if any occured. It could go back to #1.

3. I agree with the rest of your post.

 

[Pink Panther]

Don't forget the *advertiser censored* pics. They'll come out sooner or later. We've seen one. IMO no doubt it's KC.

MOO

 

[stagehand]

~snipped~

1. Drugs may come into play as far as previous behavior if any of Casey's friends give evidence that she drugged Caylee in the past. They may not prove this led to her murder but it's not pointless.

2.We haven't heard of any history of child abuse but then we don't know if any occured. It could go back to #1.

3. I agree with the rest of your post.

Respectfully, my point is there is a difference between speaking to something as being fact now and what may or may not come out at trial. It's one thing to theorize about different scenarios its another thing to get worked up about theories that are not yet proven to be facts.

 

[jujube]

Don't forget the *advertiser censored* pics. They'll come out sooner or later. We've seen one. IMO no doubt it's KC.

MOO

What *advertiser censored* pics?

Respectfully, my point is there is a difference between speaking to something as being fact now and what may or may not come out at trial. It's one thing to theorize about different scenarios its another thing to get worked up about theories that are not yet proven to be facts.

Ok.

 

[magnolia]

Based on the evidence we know of, a finding of premeditation would need to be based on speculation.

Based on the evidence we know of, a finding of manslaughter would need to be based on speculation.

Wudge, based on the evidence,the ME,Dr. G., classified the death as a homicide. I do believe the DA has evidence to tie KC to Caylee's murder.

The DA may have evidence of Premeditation, but as of this date, I don't see anything that proves KC planned the murder.

If I served as a Juror on this case, I would need traces of chloroform found in the body to tie in with the computer searches and chloro/evidence found in the trunk, before I could be convinced the murder was planned.

I've heard rumors that duct tape was found on Caylee's mouth. This may be true, but until the ME confirms, I can't regard this rumor as truth.

 

[angelmom]

TY! But as JWG points out, the crime of not responding to an accident does not allow for a murder 1 premeditated verdict. I agree that the only reason not to respond or call for help indicates KC could have cared less what happened to Caylee, and constitutes negligence. I voted murder 1 because I am certain that KC would not have acted the way she did unless she premeditated the act. HOWEVER, if a judge instructed me that I could not view her actions after the fact as pertinent to the case, it would change my verdict.

This is exactly the point. It may be perfectly legal not to seek help; however, I believe that a judge's instructions to the jury will include something about the jury members' ability to use the defendant's acts to indicate "consciousness of guilt." This could be used against a robbery suspect if he fled LE, and I believe those 31 days can be used against Casey in the same way.

Here's a very brief summary of what I mean: http://blog.austindefense.com/2006/.../the-admissibility-of-consciousness-of-guilt/

 

[weasel]

<<There are a few similarities between this case and the Scott Peterson case>>

A few? That's the understatement of the year. LOL! Just kidding. Even my husband made the comment that Casey was a female Scott Peterson and he doesn't even watch the news shows and follow cases like I do. The similarities between Scott and Casey Anthony are astounding, in my opinion. On NG's show, Jesse kept remarking how he didn't know "this" Casey. How many of SP's friends and relatives said that very same thing about him?