Has the defense created reasonable doubt?

[Bon]

Responsible as in accountable.

Got it!

 

[Bon]

It scares me as well. Even though I think the SA did a wonderful job with what they had, I had hoped that they were going to be able prove to me BARD that Casey murdered Caylee. Hopefully the jury thinks they did, if they believe that the duct tape or chloroform was used to kill her then they will find her guilty of first degree murder.

Here is some information on the law:

Jury Instructions:

http://www.floridabar.org/DIVCOM/JN/...9!OpenDocument

A link to a Legal analyst explaining jury instructions and murder charges:

http://www.cfnews13.com/article/news...murder-charges

I understand your fears about BARD but if Casey didn't kill Caylee then who did???
GA, CA, LA, RK, Zanny?????

Casey and Caylee were missing for 31 days..............Casey came back, Caylee didn't! Casey killed Caylee...................and if Cindy wouldn't have made her infamous 911 call who knows where all of this would have lead to...

 

[Who_What_When]

I don't think the jury instructions mean what you think they mean. We don't need a blow by blow detailed account of the victim being killed, in order to get past number 2 in your list. The jury will not have to rely on emotions, only common sense to determine how Caylee was killed. IMO, knowing that the duct tape covered her face is enough to know that Caylee could not have taken another breath once the tape was in place.

If you believe that the duct tape was used, then I agree you can get past number 2 (which by the way isn't my list, it's the Florida jury instructions for first degree murder), but if you don't believe duct tape was used BARD (which is what I question) you can't get pass #2. The instructions are very clear.

 

[aeneas1]

They were able to determine that there was evidence of antemortem trauma on Laci's body.

there was opposing me testimony to the following? didn't follow the case...

HARRIS: As you moved out to Laci's remains, what did you find there, or not find?

PETERSON: Well, that was the same issue. My challenge with Laci is that so much was missing. Could there have been damage before she died to the head, to the neck, to organs in the chest? There most certainly could have, but I simply found no evidence that I could point at and say This must correlate to antemortem injury. No bullets, no cut marks, just nothing that I could make into lethal damage. The toxicology was also not productive. We found some decomposition chemical and some caffeine. We probably all have caffeine. So at that point I was left with undetermined. Nothing positive there that I could make cause death.

-----------------------------------------------

9 Q. Okay. The other area that you were describing to
10 Mr. Harris regarding the -- I guess the injuries to Laci, so
11 to speak, both you and Dr. Galloway talked about multiple
12 rib fractures; is that correct?
13 A. Yes.
14 Q. Okay. And in your report, I believe you identified
15 that there were rib fractures to the left number five and
16 six and to the right number nine; is that correct?
17 A. Correct.
18 Q. Now, when she did her examination, she referred to
19 I believe the fifth and the sixth ribs show, she called it,
20 perimortem fractures; isn't that correct?
21 A. She did.
22 Q. Okay. Now, can you describe what the difference
23 between a perimortem fracture is and a postmortem fracture?
24 A. Sure. A postmortem fracture is one that occurs
25 after death. An antemortem fracture would occur before
26 death. A perimortem could be either.

------------------------------------

 

[Who_What_When]

I understand your fears about BARD but if Casey didn't kill Caylee then who did???
GA, CA, LA, RK, Zanny?????

Casey and Caylee were missing for 31 days..............Casey came back, Caylee didn't! Casey killed Caylee...................and if Cindy wouldn't have made her infamous 911 call who knows where all of this would have lead to...

I never said I didn't think she killed her. I think this is where the confusion is coming from, I don't believe Casey is innocent. I believe she is responsible for Caylee's death, I just don't know if it was a intentional murder, an accidental murder or just an accident. With the evidence presented I would have to say there is no proof of an intentional murder UNLESS you believe the duct tape and chloroform, which is where I have reasonable doubt. I do believe she is guilty of aggravated manslaughter.

 

[Bon]

If you believe that the duct tape was used, then I agree you can get past number 2 (which by the way isn't my list, it's the Florida jury instructions for first degree murder), but if you don't believe duct tape was used BARD (which is what I question) you can't get pass #2. The instructions are very clear.

Dr G stated she had to cut the duct tape out of little Caylee's hair...her face was duct taped............. And she also said no child should ever have duct tape around their face for any reason............her reasoning for homicide

 

[katydid23]

And no one is arguing she's not responsible, but what in your post addresses the issue that the death was the result of a premeditated criminal act, or the result of aggravated child abuse?

Casey typed the words ' How To Make Chloroform' into her web browser.
Casey deleted those searches immediately after Yuri came to the home.
Cindy perjured herself to try and take the blame for those computer searches.
Large amount of Chloroform was found in her trunk liner.

There were 3 large pieces of duct tape stuck in the child's hair.
The mandible was still in place, implying that the tape was around the face at one point.

Casey's behavior after the death indicates she was happy, not sad,

 

[katydid23]

I never said I didn't think she killed her. I think this is where the confusion is coming from, I don't believe Casey is innocent. I believe she is responsible for Caylee's death, I just don't know if it was a intentional murder, an accidental murder or just an accident. With the evidence presented I would have to say there is no proof of an intentional murder UNLESS you believe the duct tape and chloroform, which is where I have reasonable doubt. I do believe she is guilty of aggravated manslaughter.

If it was an accident, then that would assume she did not want her to die. Thus she would have been very sad when her child died.

But she was happy go lucky when her child died. She was texting and calling her bf with the hour. Within hours she was on a movie date, giggling and cuddling.

That tells me it was on purpose.

 

[Bon]

I never said I didn't think she killed her. I think this is where the confusion is coming from, I don't believe Casey is innocent. I believe she is responsible for Caylee's death, I just don't know if it was a intentional murder, an accidental murder or just an accident. With the evidence presented I would have to say there is no proof of an intentional murder UNLESS you believe the duct tape and chloroform, which is where I have reasonable doubt. I do believe she is guilty of aggravated manslaughter.

Even if it was an accident did Casey handle this right? Casey took LE on a wild goose chase, basically made fools of them. Cindy had to literally go and find Casey, Casey was sleeping around, screwing and tattoing as one famous lawyer is now saying.... She's seen shopping and renting movies..........is this the way a normal mother acts if her child died due to an accident (or any other way of death) for that matter.
And it may not be the law but if this is how she acted over an accidental death then IMO she at least deserves LWOP. She threw her child away like trash...could anything else be more dispicable????

 

[2goldfish]

I was asked how the body was found and told that it was similar to the way Caylee's body was found. This is how it was found which is different than how Caylee's body was found.

respectfully, I did not say they were similar in specifics - but that to me, the way the bodies were dumped/discarded/whatever both spoke of homicide to me, after listening to dr G's testimony on looking at the whole circumstance.

 

[Bon]

Casey typed the words ' How To Make Chloroform' into her web browser.
Casey deleted those searches immediately after Yuri came to the home.
Cindy perjured herself to try and take the blame for those computer searches.
Large amount of Chloroform was found in her trunk liner.

There were 3 large pieces of duct tape stuck in the child's hair.
The mandible was still in place, implying that the tape was around the face at one point.

Casey's behavior after the death indicates she was happy, not sad,

Actions speak louder than words.........in this case volumes.......

 

[Granna6]

IMO, any doubt the DT has managed to raise in the jury will easily be answered by the SA in their closing and rebuttal.

I hope so, and cannot wait to hear the closing arguments. I don't think there is reasonable doubt, but I think that a jury member or two will snag the jury for DAYS. I can just imagine the comments: "The state did not show that the child didn't die accidentally" and "There is not enough proof to warrant the DP." They will pick apart witnesses' testimony, with some siding with the state and some the defense. IMO, it was as though George Anthony was on trial, not Casey. I'd venture to say his name was mentioned and spoken far more often than Casey's. At times, she was not much more than a spectator watching her father's entire life eviscerated. The pet and Gentiva testimonies were absolutely riveting in revealing Cindy's lies and Casey's life experience with pet burial. I was thinking, "This is the nail in the coffin."

 

[Granna6]

Dr G stated she had to cut the duct tape out of little Caylee's hair...her face was duct taped............. And she also said no child should ever have duct tape around their face for any reason............her reasoning for homicide

That fact alone should silence Kronk's critics. No way could that duct tape happen to end up adhering to the toddler's face and hair by merely being jostled in the bag.

 

[Who_What_When]

Dr G stated she had to cut the duct tape out of little Caylee's hair...her face was duct taped............. And she also said no child should ever have duct tape around their face for any reason............her reasoning for homicide

I think her testimony was great for the state and I think she had a lot of valid points which I think will help the jury decide the case.

I'm just not sure if the duct tape was placed on her before or after she died, if it was even placed on her at all or if the weather and movement of her body by animals placed it there. I think if I had seen the photos it might clear this up for me, so I'm hoping it's clear for the jury.

I just find it odd that the duct tape would be used to kill someone, especially a toddler. Just look at the crime shows on TV or movies, there are so many other easier ways that this could be done why use duct tape? Unless the duct tape was used to keep her quiet and she died as a result, but then this would be aggravated manslaughter.

 

[Tuffy]

If you believe that the duct tape was used, then I agree you can get past number 2 (which by the way isn't my list, it's the Florida jury instructions for first degree murder), but if you don't believe duct tape was used BARD (which is what I question) you can't get pass #2. The instructions are very clear.

I think it's pretty clear that duct tape was used, so I guess that's why I don't get hung up on #2.

 

[JustMeDeb]

I was just listening to a replay of CM's motion for mistrial from yesterday.

Still cannot believe the nerve of the comments he made. The one that struck out most to me:

"We still don't know how she died, when she died or who was with her when she died."

Um, were you sleeping during your DT's opening statement?

According to you all, she died as a result of an accidental drowning on June 16, 2008 in the care of her mother.

 

[Who_What_When]

I hope so, and cannot wait to hear the closing arguments. I don't think there is reasonable doubt, but I think that a jury member or two will snag the jury for DAYS. I can just imagine the comments: "The state did not show that the child didn't die accidentally" and "There is not enough proof to warrant the DP." They will pick apart witnesses' testimony, with some siding with the state and some the defense. IMO, it was as though George Anthony was on trial, not Casey. I'd venture to say his name was mentioned and spoken far more often than Casey's. At times, she was not much more than a spectator watching her father's entire life eviscerated. The pet and Gentiva testimonies were absolutely riveting in revealing Cindy's lies and Casey's life experience with pet burial. I was thinking, "This is the nail in the coffin."

I hope they do. I would hate to think that the jury would just immediately vote yes to the DP without going through every piece of evidence. That is what there job is and for them not to go through every thing would be an injustice to our justice system.

 

[Bon]

I was just listening to a replay of CM's motion for mistrial from yesterday.

Still cannot believe the nerve of the comments he made. The one that struck out most to me:

"We still don't know how she died, when she died or who was with her when she died."

Um, were you sleeping during your DT's opening statement?

According to you all, she died as a result of an accidental drowning on June 16, 2008 in the care of her mother.

Is that not hysterical??? I will have to sit on my hands for this one so I don't get a time out!!!!

 

[Who_What_When]

I was just listening to a replay of CM's motion for mistrial from yesterday.

Still cannot believe the nerve of the comments he made. The one that struck out most to me:

"We still don't know how she died, when she died or who was with her when she died."

Um, were you sleeping during your DT's opening statement?

According to you all, she died as a result of an accidental drowning on June 16, 2008 in the care of her mother.

Which is why the jury has to at LEAST find her guilty of aggravated manslaughter. They admitted this themselves by saying that she died under Casey watch, add the hiding of the body and the condition of how she was found (in a bag) they have to at least convict her of aggravated manslaughter.

 

[Tuffy]

I think her testimony was great for the state and I think she had a lot of valid points which I think will help the jury decide the case.

I'm just not sure if the duct tape was placed on her before or after she died, if it was even placed on her at all or if the weather and movement of her body by animals placed it there. I think if I had seen the photos it might clear this up for me, so I'm hoping it's clear for the jury.

I just find it odd that the duct tape would be used to kill someone, especially a toddler. Just look at the crime shows on TV or movies, there are so many other easier ways that this could be done why use duct tape? Unless the duct tape was used to keep her quiet and she died as a result, but then this would be aggravated manslaughter.

Maybe it's just me, but I don't find duct tape to be difficult to use at all.

Suffocation, by many different methods has been the cause of death in many killings. I don't know why the use of duct tape in this case falls outside the realm of reasonable. JMO, crime shows on TV or movies, don't provide much in the way of reality-based information.