Has the defense created reasonable doubt?

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

gngr~snap said:
what is your take on the missing hyoid?
Click to expand...

Not really sure I have a "take" per say... Not finding it doesn't seem that unusual, as it's not articulated so it would be easy for it to migrate once the body was skeletonized. I can't remember off the top of my head at what age it would be fully ossified in a child...
 
RANCH said:
Years ago, when the Christian Brothers taught me,a thesaurus was a needed tool.The real world proved different.Maybe I should dust off the old thesaurus.
Click to expand...

OT: I grew up in Napa. Was your education there? I'm trying to remember if it was Napa or St. Helena where the Christian Brothers were located. (It's all the same to a kid.)

There was no air conditioning in those days. My parents were friends with some of the Brothers, so they would invite me and a couple of friends to come to the winery during "Indian Summer" and play in the underground caves where the wine was stored.
 
dani said:
OT: I grew up in Napa. Was your education there? I'm trying to remember if it was Napa or St. Helena where the Christian Brothers were located. (It's all the same to a kid.)

There was no air conditioning in those days. My parents were friends with some of the Brothers, so they would invite me and a couple of friends to come to the winery during "Indian Summer" and play in the underground caves where the wine was stored.
Click to expand...

The winery is in St.Helena. It's Napa.I went to school in Sacramento at CBHS.We all went to St Helena our Sr. year for retreat before graduation.
 
Freaking A... I can't believe it's 4am... Time to try and get a few hours of sleep. Just wanted to say thank you to everyone on the thread tonight... I enjoyed the excellent intellectual debate and really think it's awesome that we can discuss such an emotional topic and still maintain such a respectful environment. :)
 
GeekyGirl said:
I think it was illogical for them to ever think they could fight those in the first place. This whole defense just has me shaking my head... She would have been so much better off just taking a plea instead of rolling the dice, but to me it just emphasizes how far she's willing to go to avoid responsibility.
Click to expand...

On most other occasions when her latest lie took her to 'the end of the hall', she simply made up a new lie. When I look at the BS lies she has apparently fed her own attorneys, I'm thinking this is 'Her Last Lie'.

Book title anyone? :crazy:
 
Tennessean said:
On most other occasions when her latest lie took her to 'the end of the hall', she simply made up a new lie. When I look at the BS lies she has apparently fed her own attorneys, I'm thinking this is 'Her Last Lie'.

Book title anyone? :crazy:
Click to expand...

I strongly doubt it will be her "last lie". When she is convicted (fingers crossed) she will have many years to spin her yarns to anyone with ears. Even if she gets the DP and is in solitary confinement she won't be lonely. She'll have a whole host of new imaginary friends. :crazy:
 
My darling brother was swayed by JB. However I shared some things and challenged a few other things. This seemed to bring him back to reality. I am curious how he'll respond after the PT finishes today.

For those on the jury who might also be swayed by JB yesterday, one can only hope that the other jurists will be persuasive. So many people would b e outraged if she walks or gets off with a lesser charge.
 
My daughter and her friend think ICA must have had a head injury and they aren't talking about it.. or that she is a little retarded or something. Acts like a 12 yo...
They think she lied abpout having sex with all those guys cause she doesn't think those guys would be "into" her! lol must have been another dream.
Theyu do think she was molested by someone and that's how she got PG.

Defense dressing her like that is working for them! They think she acts funy in front of the jury casue she doesn't understand much! lol
wow I can'twait to tell her the truth!

Oh and they think CA is a sweet mom!

The girls are 20... so that's their take so far!
 
I know the DT (Baez) made the statement that his client lies, and she lies and lies again and again.

I know they made a few remarks regarding the Zanny thing being a lie and the whole Universal Studios fiasco being a lie, BUT id they EVER give an explanation , a REAL explantion as to WHY she lied and continued the lie?? a Kinda "she lied because..." in detail is what Im asking.

Ive watched this hot mess since the very beginning but darned if i can recall any REAL explanation given for her other than just a sorta glossing over admission that, "She lies"for her continued lying.

Also same question regarding ICA's actions for the 31 days if anyone would be so kind.

I sincerely appreciate it.
 
While the prosecution did a great job today I still think the defense raised enough reasonable doubt for at least one or more jurors to hang their hat on when it comes to an acquittal. Not saying it's going to happen but I think the likelihood of a hung jury is much greater than before.
 
I swear to you I am the worst thread killer. Or would that be the best thread killer. LOL. I post and the thread fades away. hahaha
 
Tricia said:
While the prosecution did a great job today I still think the defense raised enough reasonable doubt for at least one or more jurors to hang their hat on when it comes to an acquittal. Not saying it's going to happen but I think the likelihood of a hung jury is much greater than before.
Click to expand...

I am afraid of the same thing. If the Defense did a good job in jury selection I think this is VERY likely. DH says it will be a hung jury and he hasn't "followed" the case other then during the trial.
 
My Mom worked for a judge for 20 years.I think the state proved the case.
 
No.

The defense has created doubt based on irrational and illogical theories, accusations and hearsay. They have done well in muddying up what is actually a clear cut case. If the jury uses common sense, they will have no reasonable doubt. I pray they have or find their common sense.
 
ShouldBWorking said:
I am afraid of the same thing. If the Defense did a good job in jury selection I think this is VERY likely. DH says it will be a hung jury and he hasn't "followed" the case other then during the trial.
Click to expand...

If it's a hung jury, Casey will be tried again. That is the good thing.

Hung Jury does not = Casey gets off.
 
No.

The prosecutors hit it out of the ball park with their common sense and passion.

All the jurors NEED to believe is that Caylee died either as a result of the duct tape OR chloroform. Either one of those is child abuse. If Caylee was inflicted with either and died as a result, ICA is guilty of felony murder.

Beyond any reasonable doubt, there is NEVER any reason to put duct tape over the face of a person except to keep that person from screaming or breathing. Three pieces of duct tape went over Caylee's face. One over the mouth to keep Caylee quiet. Two to cover her nose so she couldn't breathe. Then the third strip was placed to cover any gaps.

Beyond any reasonable doubt, ICA used three pieces of tape to kill her daughter. The state proved its case. To go against this irrefutable evidence would be a violation of the judges instructions.

imo
 
Jolynna said:
No.

The prosecutors hit it out of the ball park with their common sense and passion.

All the jurors NEED to believe is that Caylee died either as a result of the duct tape OR chloroform. Either one of those is child abuse. If Caylee was inflicted with either and died as a result, ICA is guilty of felony murder.

Beyond any reasonable doubt, there is NEVER any reason to put duct tape over the face of a person except to keep that person from screaming or breathing. Three pieces of duct tape went over Caylee's face. One over the mouth to keep Caylee quiet. Two to cover her nose so she couldn't breathe. Then the third strip was placed to cover any gaps.

Beyond any reasonable doubt, ICA used three pieces of tape to kill her daughter. The state proved its case. To go against this irrefutable evidence would be a violation of the judges instructions.

imo
Click to expand...

I really wish I could be this confident, but I'm not. It's so hard to say what they'll think because we have so much extra information, and we've had the advantage of "deliberating" after each and every wittness.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 190 more.
Total: 445 (members: 191, guests: 254)

Online statistics

Members online
191
Guests online
254
Total visitors
445
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
609,354
Messages
18,253,105
Members
234,638
Latest member
Josefa
Back
Top