No, can't say I have been hunting game birds lately. On my bucket list now, I guess.
Does the game bird engage in hand to hand combat, too? Taking that off the bucket list if I have to deal with true angry birds.
Has the defense created reasonable doubt?
- Thread starter butterfly1978
- Start date
No, can't say I have been hunting game birds lately. On my bucket list now, I guess.
Does the game bird engage in hand to hand combat, too? Taking that off the bucket list if I have to deal with true angry birds.
GeekyGirl
I rock at Trivial Pursuit, just don't ask me where
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 714
- Reaction score
- 1
I just can't understand this though... I'm supposed to believe that not only was she was smart enough to make Chloroform (which isn't that difficult, but still requires at least a little intelligence to do without something going wrong), but she also managed to make it without leaving a single piece of evidence behind of where or when she made it, but when it came time to research how to kill a toddler she looks up ruptured spleen, shovel, hand to hand combat, internal bleeding and neck breaking? That just doesn't sit right with me. I can probably think of 10 easier, less detectable ways of killing people off the top of my head just from plots in TV shows and movies. (I really, really hope I'm never falsely accused* of murder, because I'm sure that statement will come back to haunt me) Maybe she did research it back then, maybe she did make it, but if she was plotting to kill anyone in March, I don't think it was Caylee. Then again, she's CCFCP so maybe I'm completely wrong. MOO
*Not implying anything about the current trial, only that I'm fairly certain I'm not ever committing murder, so if I was arrested for it, then the charges would be false.
RANCH
United we stand, divided we fall.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2008
- Messages
- 17,953
- Reaction score
- 36,600
Two year olds don't engage in hand to hand combat either but they can certainly have their necks broken. Just not in this case.Hey, I didn't do the research, but someone did.
GeekyGirl
I rock at Trivial Pursuit, just don't ask me where
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 714
- Reaction score
- 1
Gotcha.
GeekyGirl
I rock at Trivial Pursuit, just don't ask me where
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 714
- Reaction score
- 1
I'm with you on that last part, I'll be happy if she doesn't ever have the chance to hurt a child again.
GeekyGirl
I rock at Trivial Pursuit, just don't ask me where
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 714
- Reaction score
- 1
Totally OT but that made me spit my soda across my coffee table. Visions of being in a fist fight with the yellow "angry bird"...
RANCH
United we stand, divided we fall.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2008
- Messages
- 17,953
- Reaction score
- 36,600
Chloroform in this case is a tough one to figure out. It's been proven that searches where on the family computer. Its been proven that abnormal amounts where found in the Sunfire trunk. Why? I don't know, but somethings not right. Duct tape over the nose and mouth is easy to see. Would that tape kill Caylee? Think about it.
I agree, Ranch. I can't figure why the state included that search term. It undermines their case to me by making me wonder if she had some BF that was threatening her or what have you. Or maybe she was plotting to kill the whole family and not Caylee.
GeekyGirl
I rock at Trivial Pursuit, just don't ask me where
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2010
- Messages
- 714
- Reaction score
- 1
Oh trust me I've thought about it obsessively... The chloroform has always been a bit of a stretch for me. Internet searches three months before hand and high amounts found over a month afterward in the trunk, by scientists with a new technology (not that new makes it bad) who specifically stated they could not speculate as to when it got there, or what the source of it was. If it wasn't for the fact that someone went to the trouble of deleting the searches immediately after Caylee's "disappearance" was reported, I'd discount it completely, bc sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. Still, without something else tying it to the actual crime (evidence Casey bought materials to make it, for example) it's just too big a logical leap for me to make to say it had to be involved. And the duct tape? My issues with that are less clearly defined.
Bon
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2008
- Messages
- 1,577
- Reaction score
- 1
Oh no, I know I won't be happy with that verdict..............
pcrum12
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 26, 2009
- Messages
- 1,111
- Reaction score
- 2,201
Call me crazy but under no circumstance do I see ICA intentionally killing this child. I just can't go there. I still say some type of accidental death. Whether it was the pool, putting her to sleep with chloroform, I don't know. The child was obviously in the trunk but that doesn't mean she was put there alive. As for the pool, the child did not need the ladder to be UP. She could have stood on the ladder's side and got in the pool. I know I'm a minority here but I just can't go there. I don't care how many lies, hot body contest, or sex partners. That doesn't prove premeditated murder. By all accounts she loved the child. Yes, she is a young mother that took advantage of her parents to watch the child. But, there are plenty of young and older mothers that do that. They leave them here and there, etc. Can I buy negligent homicide, yes. Not Murder. IMOO
Chewy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2010
- Messages
- 2,566
- Reaction score
- 2,342
I think, as I've said before, that all theatrics and theories aside, this case boils down to two possibilities.
1. Casey Anthony accidentally killed her daughter and then tried to hide the body or make it look like a kidnapping.
Now if she wanted to plead this case, this was the time to do it. They started off showing that they were going for this angle but then spent the entire defense in DEFENDING her against circumstantial evidence rather than getting her to say "what really happened."
It was a gamble but they had a shot. They could have had Casey take the stand and plead that case. But they didn't because they know it's not true and it would have been shredded.
They also did not aggressively strip down GA in a way that suggested that J Baez actually believed the things he was accusing GA of. If I was the defense I'd have ripped into that guy with everything if I'm trying to make it look like he had something to do with it. I'd be disgusted by him, that his actions led CA through sexual abuse and destroyed as a mother and all that he'd put Cindy through. I'd also be angry because he caused Caylee to die.
But the defense did not do that because they knew the story was full of it the minute they said it.
We have Cindy Anthony lying about the computer searches which only serves to prove that there is a REASON to lie about the computer searches. For me the computer searches meant absolutely nothing. But lying about who did them made me think she was covering something up.
Bottom line is that if Casey DID accidentally do this, she has had three years to come clean and tell us what happened. But she didn't. She didn't because she knows she is responsible for killing her child and trying to cover it up.
The second possibility is that Casey Anthony murdered her daughter. Second degree, accident whatever, she killed her kid. And she didn't do anything for a month.
So this tells me that she did not react like a normal person to the death of her child, which leads me to believe that she did not treat her child in a normal way. So even if it was an accident, she neglected her child to such a degree that she caused her death.
I'm not worried about the DP because I'm against it, but there is no reasonable doubt here at all.
Sure they didn't prove WHAT she did, but they certainly took away all doubt that she is ultimately the one that is responsible for the death of her child.
I think they will deliberate for about 7 hours before someone realizes that they are debating pointless crap. It all comes down to that 911 call
1. Casey Anthony accidentally killed her daughter and then tried to hide the body or make it look like a kidnapping.
Now if she wanted to plead this case, this was the time to do it. They started off showing that they were going for this angle but then spent the entire defense in DEFENDING her against circumstantial evidence rather than getting her to say "what really happened."
It was a gamble but they had a shot. They could have had Casey take the stand and plead that case. But they didn't because they know it's not true and it would have been shredded.
They also did not aggressively strip down GA in a way that suggested that J Baez actually believed the things he was accusing GA of. If I was the defense I'd have ripped into that guy with everything if I'm trying to make it look like he had something to do with it. I'd be disgusted by him, that his actions led CA through sexual abuse and destroyed as a mother and all that he'd put Cindy through. I'd also be angry because he caused Caylee to die.
But the defense did not do that because they knew the story was full of it the minute they said it.
We have Cindy Anthony lying about the computer searches which only serves to prove that there is a REASON to lie about the computer searches. For me the computer searches meant absolutely nothing. But lying about who did them made me think she was covering something up.
Bottom line is that if Casey DID accidentally do this, she has had three years to come clean and tell us what happened. But she didn't. She didn't because she knows she is responsible for killing her child and trying to cover it up.
The second possibility is that Casey Anthony murdered her daughter. Second degree, accident whatever, she killed her kid. And she didn't do anything for a month.
So this tells me that she did not react like a normal person to the death of her child, which leads me to believe that she did not treat her child in a normal way. So even if it was an accident, she neglected her child to such a degree that she caused her death.
I'm not worried about the DP because I'm against it, but there is no reasonable doubt here at all.
Sure they didn't prove WHAT she did, but they certainly took away all doubt that she is ultimately the one that is responsible for the death of her child.
I think they will deliberate for about 7 hours before someone realizes that they are debating pointless crap. It all comes down to that 911 call
RANCH
United we stand, divided we fall.
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2008
- Messages
- 17,953
- Reaction score
- 36,600
Ok.I think your paying to much attention to what JB says.Hand to Hand combat doesn't necessarily mean self defense.It means using your hands to inflict injury to some one else. Self defense means to defend yourself from attack from another.
Bon
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 6, 2008
- Messages
- 1,577
- Reaction score
- 1
Add duct tape to this scenario,cut out of her hair by the coroner:twocents: And putting her to sleep with chloroform wouldn't be negligent homicide, would it? Wouldn't that fall under aggravated child abuse? I just don't see this as an accident......she is going to spend 3 yrs of her life in jail when LE gave her every chance to say it was an accident and she panicked.....
Kat
Kind words do not cost much
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2008
- Messages
- 17,190
- Reaction score
- 1,057
Thanks for having the tenacity and probably courage to share a viewpoint that differs from the majority. I may not agree with you but I hella respect the fact you have an opinion and you are willing to share it.
Thanks!