Has the defense created reasonable doubt?

[Leah0107]

5th district court of appeals Huck vs. State pg. 13

"More importantly, the assertion that Mr. Huck taped the victim's eyes and mouth shut after she died is not particularly reasonable. The only logical reason to tape her eyes and mouth shut would have been to prevent her from seeing, talking, screaming for help or breathing while she was alive. There is no logical or reasonable purpose for taping a person's eyes and mouth shut after she is dead." pg 13

5D03-1906.op

If Chloroform is a stretch to believe how about this? If you read the full autopsy report including the osteological findings, it says: "A hair mat was noted on the base of the skull and grayish colored tape was noted covering the mouth and nasal aperture areas."
pg 3 or 13.

 

[Lake Erie Princess]

IMO the Prosecution has presented too much circumstancial evidence in the case. IMO these will hurt the defense, and Casey will be found guilty.

In my heart, I believe that this was an accident that snowballed. But...Casey was an adult and should have told, from day 1 ! She needs to be accountable for Caylee's loss of life. It was up to Casey to keep her baby safe, and I do not feel that she did !

 

[Chris_Texas]

And I don't dispute your right to think that way. It's not enough for me, there's an extremely long post further up that explains in detail why I feel that way. Sometimes they just don't have enough evidence. Does that suck? Absolutely. Should we be understanding and cut the state some slack? Absolutely not. It is their burden and it is there for a reason.

As a matter of principle I agree with you. In this case, however, I disagree that the state failed to do their job. They demonstrated that murder was not only possible, but probable. More, the defense not only failed to undermine the prosecution's case, but they also failed to offer any competing theory or explanation for the facts the prosecution presented.

And while it is true that the defense is not legally obligated to offer theories of their own, they absolutely do if they wish an alternative explanation of the facts be considered. The jury must debate the evidence presented.

The evidence indicates murder. ALL the evidence indicates murder. NO evidence suggests anything but murder. If, in fact, it was an accident of some kind, it really no longer matters -- no one stood up and said, "This is what happened: she fell, she drowned, she got into the cleaning supplies, she was abducted by space alliens, we panicked!" No one offered evidence of these things, and the jury is not empowered to make these theories up on their own, nor will the defense be allowed to offer them in their closing arguments.

The evidence shows that this child was murdered. How she was murdered is irrelevant.

I think some people are getting a little confused because mommy was the killer. If we dig up the basement of a serial killer and uncover some skeletons, no one here would suggest that we can't prove murder because we don't precisely HOW he killed them. And yet here people are suggesting just that. ICA had the kid, the kid ended up dead and hidden, and we even have evidence showing that mommy dearest was researching murder techniques. What MORE could you possibly want?

 

[Chris_Texas]

IMO the Prosecution has presented too much circumstancial evidence in the case. IMO these will hurt the defense, and Casey will be found guilty.

In my heart, I believe that this was an accident that snowballed. But...Casey was an adult and should have told, from day 1 ! She needs to be accountable for Caylee's loss of life. It was up to Casey to keep her baby safe, and I do not feel that she did !

My hope is that the jury decides based on the evidence rather than their emotions.

 

[donnam]

Respectfully, I think uncommonly strong is a bit of a stretch. Did you read my post about why I'm uncomfortable about the chloroform evidence?

ETA: Why would people with pools have pure acetone?

Acetone has absolutely nothing to do with pools. It is in nail polish remover and you can buy pure acetone anywhere. It is mostly used to remove fake nails as it dissolves the plastic,

 

[Chewy]

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????

Thank you.

The concept of felony murder is one that I didn't totally get at first either, so I understand where you are coming from.

Bear in mind that "murder" is not an act, it's a legal conclusion that the person convicted of it bears criminal responsibility for an unlawful death and must suffer the greatest consequences set for in the law for an unlawful death. If you see, with your own eyes, person A shoot person B you witness a homicide, it may be an act of murder but there's no way to actually know at the moment.

Murder, again, is a judgement of legal responsibility. If I contract with an assassin for the killing of someone and arrange for the killing to occur in the middle of the business day when I'm sitting in a meeting room with a dozen other people I'm still guilty of murder even though I never laid a hand on the victim, because my actions are what lead to the death of the victim.

What many talk about here is "premeditated" murder, which is a homicide that is planned in advance and carried out to completion past opportunities to stop the actions that result in the death of the victim. This is one of the most heinous acts that one can commit against their fellow man. For this we reserve the punishments of life in prison or execution.

What Casey is charged with is felony murder. This sounds redundant, as murder is a felony charge. What the charge actually means, however, is that a homicide resulted in close connection with ANOTHER felony. The homicide itself or any act intimately connected with the homicide, such as battery, cannot be the felony that qualifies.

Casey's qualifying felony (Florida has 16 possible) is aggravated child abuse. The State does not have to show that a specific act of child abuse resulted in Caylee's death, they need to show that Caylee was being abused as defined by the statute and ended up dead due, in some part, to a result of the abuse.

So if the State can show that Caylee was abused and the abuse lead to her death, then they have proven 1st degree murder. No premeditation is needed and does not have to be shown - she has not been charged that way. The State also does not have to show the precise mechanism of death, the precise time of death, and so forth. Most homicides occur with only the victim and perp present, to require the State to prove things that can only be known by the victim (who cannot speak) and the perp (who cannot be compelled to speak) would mean nobody could ever be convicted of murder if they do a little bit of planning. That's not how it works.

This is a great post and I hope people take time to read it. It seems people are confused that the very nature of the relationship between Casey and Caylee, contributes to the definition of the felony murder charge.


Also the defense type argument stating "we don't know how she died" completely contradicts their statement that she drowned

 

[smartsass]

There's a post earlier in thread where I considered how hard it would be to suffocate a conscious child with duct tape.I'm sorry, I just can't type it again, it was too hard.

I thought the same thing until I came across these stories and I'm guessing there's more where these came from.
Cases of suffocation from duct tape:

Kenisha Barry, killed 4-day old son Malachi, bound face and arms with duct tape
http://www.tdcaa.com/node/1480


Man suffocated with duct tape after robber wraps it around his head
[ame="http://www.newnation.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=113250"]Nigra Kills Video Store Manager; Suffocated With Duct Tape - NNN Reporters Newsroom Forum[/ame]



Man suffocates woman with duct tape
http://www.ksat.com/news/19263389/detail.html

 

[LinasK]

i live in the sf bay area but didn't follow the case at all, although it was obviously very big news here. your post reminded me of something that i think often gets lost in the discussion and that's the utterly devastating impact an unbelievable alibi has on a defendant's case. when the forensic dust settles, and the dna and fiber comparisons are put to rest, i think a jury always returns to what is most simple: did the story the defendant gave to investigators make sense, was it believable, could it be backed up. in sp's and ica's case, the answer is a resounding no.

Okay, color me amazed! I'm also in the Bay Area, and I learned of the case immediately after she was declared missing because of the media saturation. How did you not follow it???:waitasec:

 

[tbgo]

Her defense just sent her up the river.

 

[GeekyGirl]

Acetone has absolutely nothing to do with pools. It is in nail polish remover and you can buy pure acetone anywhere. It is mostly used to remove fake nails as it dissolves the plastic,

I understand that, it was in response to the OP saying that both ingredients that make up chloroform are commonly found in people who own pools, that's all.

 

[GeekyGirl]

After hearing the state's first part of closing, I have to say, I'd probably vote for first degree if I were a juror. Two things pushed me over the edge, the description of the duct tape being wrapped under the chin, and the reminder that Casey told both parents that Caylee would be staying at the nanny's that night. The first made me consider that she was holding Caylee from behind when she applied the tape, which eliminates the problem I had with the logistics and the second suggests that she knew Caylee wouldn't be alive that evening, since she wouldn't have been welcome at Tony's. Still not convinced the chloroform had anything to do with this, but I do think the duct tape was COD.

 

[Who_What_When]

After hearing the state's first part of closing, I have to say, I'd probably vote for first degree if I were a juror. Two things pushed me over the edge, the description of the duct tape being wrapped under the chin, and the reminder that Casey told both parents that Caylee would be staying at the nanny's that night. The first made me consider that she was holding Caylee from behind when she applied the tape, which eliminates the problem I had with the logistics and the second suggests that she knew Caylee wouldn't be alive that evening, since she wouldn't have been welcome at Tony's. Still not convinced the chloroform had anything to do with this, but I do think the duct tape was COD.

I was thinking the same thing. They did a great job explaining the duct tape and I can now see that being the cause of death. With that I too would probably be able to vote for first degree murder.

Although I have never been a fan of the defense I have to say that after hearing the Jose talk about the Chloroform, I have completely discounted any thought that it was used on Caylee. I think he did a great job (yes this is shocking to me too!) going through this evidence and the computer searches and bringing it all together. I was never convinced that it was use or even a factor in this case and have always thought it had to do with Ricardo's Myspace picture, so to hear that she was on myspace right before searching Chloroform just makes sense to me. It would be exactly what I would do if my boyfriend had the picture posted and I didn't know what it was. I'm still keeping an open mind and will wait to hear what the SA says about the 84 searches and what their thoughts are on it, but as of now I don't believe that Chloroform played a role in her murder.

 

[Justin Tyme]

Not in my opinion.

 

[GeekyGirl]

I was thinking the same thing. They did a great job explaining the duct tape and I can now see that being the cause of death. With that I too would probably be able to vote for first degree murder.

Although I have never been a fan of the defense I have to say that after hearing the Jose talk about the Chloroform, I have completely discounted any thought that it was used on Caylee. I think he did a great job (yes this is shocking to me too!) going through this evidence and the computer searches and bringing it all together. I was never convinced that it was use or even a factor in this case and have always thought it had to do with Ricardo's Myspace picture, so to hear that she was on myspace right before searching Chloroform just makes sense to me. It would be exactly what I would do if my boyfriend had the picture posted and I didn't know what it was. I'm still keeping an open mind and will wait to hear what the SA says about the 84 searches and what their thoughts are on it, but as of now I don't believe that Chloroform played a role in her murder.

LOL I'm starting to think that you're my mental doppelganger...

 

[Trident]

Picking apart each piece of circumstantial evidence proved to me, once again, that there is no actual evidence. The only reason I believe ICA is guilty is the 31 days, and even then I wonder what really happened to Caylee. Did she drown her? Choke her? What? I can honestly say I don't know, but I do know I've seen no proof that Casey murdered her, let alone with premeditation. So, Yes, I believe the DT did create reasonable doubt.

Edited to add: I'm not sure I want her walking the street either, she seems "off" somehow, but if I were a juror, I could not in any good conscience vote her guilty beyond a reasonable doubt - then when she killed someone else, or something equally horrid, I could sit back and blame myself.

 

[Doodlelover]

There is NO way she can walk from this. Whether we think it was an accident gone wrong and not premeditated murder, this child was found DEAD with duct tape, and no matter how it got there, before or after an accident, it is aggravated Child abuse, and that in Florida is Murder one.

There is NO way this girl can walk out of there after she and she alone was present when her child died, threw her in the bush and then partied for 31 days, accident or not, she is at the VERY LEAST responsible for aggravated child abuse.

She will get minimum 30 years and I think she will get LWOP

 

[GeekyGirl]

There is NO way she can walk from this. Whether we think it was an accident gone wrong and not premeditated murder, this child was found DEAD with duct tape, and no matter how it got there, before or after an accident, it is aggravated Child abuse, and that in Florida is Murder one.

There is NO way this girl can walk out of there after she and she alone was present when her child died, threw her in the bush and then partied for 31 days, accident or not, she is at the VERY LEAST responsible for aggravated child abuse.

She will get minimum 30 years and I think she will get LWOP

I don't mean to upset you, because I really love your posts, and I really do think the duct tape was the COD, but in the hypothetical situation where duct tape is applied after Caylee died, how is that aggravated child abuse? Or did you mean after an accident, but before she died? Just trying to understand your thoughts.

 

[RANCH]

Picking apart each piece of circumstantial evidence proved to me, once again, that there is no actual evidence. The only reason I believe ICA is guilty is the 31 days, and even then I wonder what really happened to Caylee. Did she drown her? Choke her? What? I can honestly say I don't know, but I do know I've seen no proof that Casey murdered her, let alone with premeditation. So, Yes, I believe the DT did create reasonable doubt.

Edited to add: I'm not sure I want her walking the street either, she seems "off" somehow, but if I were a juror, I could not in any good conscience vote her guilty beyond a reasonable doubt - then when she killed someone else, or something equally horrid, I could sit back and blame myself.

So you think it was an accidental drowning,but ICA shouldn't be walking the street? Interesting.

 

[GeekyGirl]

Picking apart each piece of circumstantial evidence proved to me, once again, that there is no actual evidence. The only reason I believe ICA is guilty is the 31 days, and even then I wonder what really happened to Caylee. Did she drown her? Choke her? What? I can honestly say I don't know, but I do know I've seen no proof that Casey murdered her, let alone with premeditation. So, Yes, I believe the DT did create reasonable doubt.

Edited to add: I'm not sure I want her walking the street either, she seems "off" somehow, but if I were a juror, I could not in any good conscience vote her guilty beyond a reasonable doubt - then when she killed someone else, or something equally horrid, I could sit back and blame myself.

In your opinion, is there enough for a verdict of aggravated manslaughter?

 

[dr dona]

I will never have any doubt---Casey killed her child!!!!