HOW does the State Prove it was not George?

[Soulmagent]

From the facts presented, it is not reasonable to assume GA did it. This is exactly my gripe with the term "Reasonable Doubt". People consistently get it confused with "Beyond the shadow of a a doubt. I hope the jurors don't do this and slip GA in their heads as a perp. It is to be expected to have doubts in any case presented butthe question is, is your doubt reasonable in this case? IMO, no.

Where did the term "Beyond a shadow of a doubt" originate? Mr. Baez would like everyone to take that stance and that is what he is hanging his hat on. For every doubt you have about ICA not being the perp, ask yourself is this thought a reasonable one? Then refresh yourself using Dr. G's words. She explained the concept "reasonable doubt" very well, w/o using the term.

Jumping off your resonable post.

Reasonable doubt is subjective. What one person considers reasonable may seem unreasonable to another. It is unreasonable to murder a 2 year old , yet here we are considering the considering it is reasonable to believe Casey Anthony made chloroform and knocked her child out with it and then applied duct tape to her face, stuck a heart sticker on the tape and dropped her in the woods like trash ,yet with special belongings which belonged to her child and lead back to the house and she planned the the murder only to drive 15 house away to concel her crime. It completely baffles a logical mind.

 

[QuietStorm]

In arguing for acquittal, CM reminded the judge that the burden of proof was on the state. This was after the judge questioned CM about his use of "accidental death" in his acquittal argument. CM's response leads me to believe that they are not going to back up everything in their opening statement. IMHO they are going to continue to muddy the waters and leave it at that.

 

[crucibelle]

It is classic he said/she said- who is the bigger liar???
For the entire list posted for access to items- ICA also had unsupervised access to all of those things as well- duct tape, car, evidence found with the remains...
It will come down to who the jury believes more and there has been a lot of evidence of what a liar ICA is.
Top that all off with each of their behaviors (BOTH very well documented) through the jail house videos, witness testimony of what type of grandfather he is, his searching for Caylee, his contacting John Walsh, his trying to get interviews with ICA and the FBI- not to mention his saying he would do anything for his daughter..
it comes down to this: if the original reason he covered up the crime was to protect ICA from getting arrested for child neglect, would he really sit by and not do anything when she was charged with murder, told the SA would seek the DP AND sat in jail for 3 years? It just defies common sense.
And I haven't even gotten into his knowing of CPR, his knowledge of evidence from being a cop (a cop would not let a dead body sit in a trunk for that long OR use materials from their house OR dump their precious grandchild's body a block and a half from their home. He would have put her body where it would have been never found- including RK.
as far as the duct tape goes, would a cop really use the SAMe duct tape that he used to stage his granddaughter's body ON NATIONAL TELEVISION and in front of a whole bunch of people searching for her?
It think there is PLENTY of evidence that it is not GA. JMOO

BBM. To be fair (and I think a lot of people forget about this), the defense is saying that George wanted to implicate KC - that he wanted her to take the blame and he tried to remove himself as far away from the situation as possible. So, in my opinion, he WOULD dump the body in a way he thought KC would do it. He would make those "mistakes" on purpose to implicate KC. That said, I DO NOT think George did any of this.

 

[stilettos]

In arguing for acquittal, CM reminded the judge that the burden of proof was on the state. This was after the judge questioned CM about his use of "accidental death" in his acquittal argument. CM's response leads me to believe that they are not going to back up everything in their opening statement. IMHO they are going to continue to muddy the waters and leave it at that.

Then they will lose.

 

[crucibelle]

I think that CA needs to testify emphatically that KC never told her or indicated to her that GA had acted inappropriately.

I think the jail house videos (and there are more than one) of GA urging KC to speak with someone from the FBI and/or any other LE authority need to be replayed. Why would a pedophile try to get his vic to talk to police?

The totally careless aspects of this case, ie the decomp in the car and location of the remains, completely destroys the notion that GA is responsible. If anything, the man is meticulous. If GA had control of those remains, Caylee would have been buried deeply, far from Hopespring.

The duct tape on the skull discounts drowning and staging a kidnapping, imo. Duct tape wouldn't stick to wet hair.

I do worry about KC's acting talent if she testifies. She has a knack for putting on the sorry little victim voice and mannerisms. Her voice can be deceptively soft and childlike when she's conning someone. Watch the video of her conviction where she apologizes to Amy.

This woman is so clearly a psychopath that it would be a complete travesty of justice if she walks. And honestly, who wants her? Does CA have any illusion that she and KC can ever live together again? Who wants to live with a pariah?

BBM. Not if he was trying to implicate Casey, as the defense has said. Think about that for a minute. I personally DO NOT think George had anything to do with it, but IF he did, he would not have done things in a way that would point to him.

 

[BuzzieCat]

As someone who has participated in several autopsies including those of children. Regardless of manner of death, the body is thoroughly examined from head to toe detecting any abnormalities along the way. The genitals and anal region are also visually inspected for any signs of injuries. If a child had "tearing" or any signs that may lead the ME to suspect child abuse, it would be noted in the ME's report and Child Protection Services along with the proper police jurisdiction would be immediately notified.

That makes sense. But even if she had been found to have evidence of that kind of abuse, it wouldn't prove GA did it unless there was some DNA evidence on the body that was proved to be GA's. Not sure how long such evidence lasts and what would happen to it if such an abuse victim was found drowned in a pool, having been immersed in a significant quantity of water. Without DNA evidence, suggestions of tearing wouldn't automatically prove GA (or LA or any other specific person) did it.

No one knows how much I worry about that term "Reasonable Doubt". I have seen people on juries nod their heads "yes" when asked if they understand it. Dollars to donuts they are thinking "Beyond the shadow of a doubt" and don't understand the term. I would like to see a test given or a class given to prospective jurors on this important issue.

Defendants have walked on the charges due to a juror or two not grasping the concept.

I hope the SA can/will get in a little explanation on "reasonable doubt" in their closing arguments. Maybe they only do that on lawyer drama shows, but I've worried about it too. Surely the jury does understand that Baez can't claim aliens came out of the sky and killed Caylee, and since we can't definitively prove or disprove the existence of aliens, ICA should be set free. Because the story Baez has proposed is just about as far-fetched as aliens.

 

[Hisimage]

Dunno. What I do know i the DT is going to try to pin this all on GA.

In relation to GA or this other man contacting him the day before CA reported Caylee missing. Are there cell phone records on GA before she was reported missing? Can we see them? I am not even as seasoned as the most of you in finding that information.

 

[eleni777]

I just read these tweets on Wesh TV. Does anyone know who Vasco Dagama Thompson is?


Ch.9 reports George Anthony contacted Vasco Dagama Thompson the day before Cindy called about Caylee missing. #CaseyAnthonyby oscaseyanthony via twitter 6/15/2011 4:15:23 PM at 12:15 PM

Court records show Vasco Dagama Thompson was convicted of kidnapping on March 1988. #CaseyAnthonyby oscaseyanthony via twitter 6/15/2011 4:15:13 PM at 12:15 PM

Reports show convicted felon Vasco Dagama Thompson added to #CaseyAnthony defense witness list.by oscaseyanthony via twitter 6/15/2011 4:13:21 PM at 12:13 PM
===============================================

WTH is this all about???????????????? Anyone know?

Good Lord.. Just when I thought I've gone as far as I can go on the train to Crazy Town, I realize I was wrong and Insanity has many levels...

 

[LinasK]

Very simply- the heart stickers. George is too macho to ever have used heart stickers on the duct tape, and the heart stickers were found in the drawer in Casey's room. That points directly to Casey.

 

[QuietStorm]

BBM. To be fair (and I think a lot of people forget about this), the defense is saying that George wanted to implicate KC - that he wanted her to take the blame and he tried to remove himself as far away from the situation as possible. So, in my opinion, he WOULD dump the body in a way he thought KC would do it. He would make those "mistakes" on purpose to implicate KC. That said, I DO NOT think George did any of this.

IF this was an accident, there would have been an IMMENSE hurry to get rid of the body. No time for much thought, IMHO.

 

[mimmy03]

personally i feel that in the OS the DT left too many holes in their story as to what happened after GA supposedly says "look what you did! your mother will never forgive you". after that it just kinda drops off to some guy named RK who is out moving a body for fame and money. they left out a lot of important info that i feel they will just make up along the way as they see fit. b/c of this they would lose all credibility with me if i were a juror, not to mention their client is a pathological liar.

 

[LinasK]

George had control of the duct tape.

He had keys to the Pontiac.

He had access to all of the burial items.

He knew about the burial site.

He attempted suicide.

He did not call LE when he left the tow yard.

He had no response when he first 'learned' about Caylee being missing.

He went secretly to LE and gave incriminating evidence about Casey.

Casey has all the symptoms of abuse survivor.

George lied and cheated on his wife.

George lied about having a job for awhile.

George had a bad gambling addiction and liked to look at escort sites.

George had a very volatile temper.

George had keys to the Pontiac because it was still registered in his name. :snootyoesn't prove anything, even Cindy said yesterday on the stand that she and Lee rode in the car...

 

[Soulmagent]

personally i feel that in the OS the DT left too many holes in their story as to what happened after GA supposedly says "look what you did! your mother will never forgive you". after that it just kinda drops off to some guy named RK who is out moving a body for fame and money. they left out a lot of important info that i feel they will just make up along the way as they see fit. b/c of this they would lose all credibility with me if i were a juror, not to mention their client is a pathological liar.

This is where I expect JB to present a stupid little chart calender showing the dates of increases in the reward with injunctions for where the calls to LE reporting the site. It wont prove anything but he gets to use the paper again.

 

[GeekyGirl]

Jumping off your resonable post.

Reasonable doubt is subjective. What one person considers reasonable may seem unreasonable to another. It is unreasonable to murder a 2 year old , yet here we are considering the considering it is reasonable to believe Casey Anthony made chloroform and knocked her child out with it and then applied duct tape to her face, stuck a heart sticker on the tape and dropped her in the woods like trash ,yet with special belongings which belonged to her child and lead back to the house and she planned the the murder only to drive 15 house away to concel her crime. It completely baffles a logical mind.

Well said. It's such a baffling case all the way around.

 

[katydid23]

Only someone with direct knowledge of any alleged affairs would be able to testify about this....and the only people who could do this would be George himself, Cindy, and any of George's mistresses. Casey herself couldn't even testify to this if it was something she was told, even if it was by Cindy.
I don't see that happening.

and the bigger point is that the DT's theory is not reasonable to believe, and that is the key here. it must be reasonable doubt...and I don't think their bizarre, far-fetched theory is going to do that for them.

They have one of his alleged girlfriends on the witness list I believe. River Cruz. And she has already said that George told her ' it was an accident that snowballed out of control.' That is the same quote Baez used in his opening, so I bet she comes to the stand.

 

[goldenlover]

Very simply- the heart stickers. George is too macho to ever have used heart stickers on the duct tape, and the heart stickers were found in the drawer in Casey's room. That points directly to Casey.

The heart sticker found at the crime scene was attached to a piece of cardboard and was a puffy plastic sticker. The ones found in Casey's room were not the same. They were flat, paper stickers. The stickers do not match and we do not know a sticker was ever on the duct tape. There is no proof. If the fingerprint girl said she saw it and showed her supervisor, why did the SA not call the supervisor as a witness also? Probably because she was the sticky adhesive and said she could not be sure it was heart shaped and the SA did not want her testimony. If her supervisor also was sure she saw the heart outline I think the SA would have called her as a witness also, since there was no photo of the outline on the ductape. The stickers do not point directly to Casey at all. They do not point to anything, they are irrelevent, IMO.

 

[Solace]

The State says George got rid of the body and then Kronk found it and kept it until he replaced it in December.

Why they say this is beyond me because they could have said she drowned in the pool, KC was totally afraid and disposed of the body after a few days (they could even have said she could not bear to get rid of Caylee) even that would be better than George found her and disposed of it.

BECAUSE now they have to contend with the odor from the car which was testified to by about 10 people and two dog handlers.

What the jury comes away with is Baez is lying, George never had anything to do with it, KC put the child in the trunk and disposed of her.

And they will feel this way because it is obvious to anyone that there was a body in the trunk WHICH BAEZ SAYS IS NOT TRUE. So if he is lying about that, he is lying about George and trying to save his client.

That bodes very bad for KC - because she comes across, as she is, someone who has been caught and is now putting her father out as the sexual abuser (as bad as it gets) and the disposer of the body.

 

[LyndyLoo]

Hummmm..I agree with some here who say that the State does not have to prove that George did NOT do it..First did what..Kill Caylee or coverup the murder??

Its up to the Defense to show and show to the jury convincing evidence of what they declared in their OS...That was their first mistake. Their next mistake was going into enflammatory descriptions of Georges abuses of KC..then moved on to morally bankrupt Kronk..Geesh..Mistake number2..then they went on to excuse KC's lying ways is because of abuse..maybe bordering on "insane" of at the very least Mentally unstable..Mistake #3..

According to DT its all because of her abuses ( gag ) she acted so carefree and celebrated freedom because of that... hummm GMAB OHHH Yeah..Perfected Lying:floorlaugh:

The huge thing that stands out for me is that pool ladder Cindy found June 16, 2008 up on the poolside..and HUGE for me is the side gate was open (leading her to believe someone had been swimming in her pool?) Do you not think IF George was coveringup such a fantasy that her would do that?..BUT..I would believe that KC would set it up to appear someone came there and abducted Caylee!! and left in a hurry...

Manipulative minds like KC often look at things too complexed..and try to cover up things more than necessary to Bid Time until they can figure out their next move...Thus Caylee put into trunk..not counting on heat excellerating decomposition..Yikes..Smell..yikes what to do ??

Bottomline..DT has a HUGE burden to fulfill to back up their OS..tho not evidence OS are meant to outline your CIC and what you expect to prove..
Hummmmmm Good luck with that JB and CM:rocker:

Apologize this is so long..but felt I wanted to outline why I think the way I do:seeya:

 

[gitana1]

Jumping off your resonable post.

Reasonable doubt is subjective. What one person considers reasonable may seem unreasonable to another. It is unreasonable to murder a 2 year old , yet here we are considering the considering it is reasonable to believe Casey Anthony made chloroform and knocked her child out with it and then applied duct tape to her face, stuck a heart sticker on the tape and dropped her in the woods like trash ,yet with special belongings which belonged to her child and lead back to the house and she planned the the murder only to drive 15 house away to concel her crime. It completely baffles a logical mind.

But this is a misunderstanding of reasonable doubt. The jury is not to examine whether it is reasonable for casey to have done what the state is accusing her of. Almost no murder is reasonable.

Instead, the jury is asked to determine if there can be any reasonable doubt that casey did what she is accused of, not whether what she may have done was reasonable or not. There is a huge difference.

 

[GeekyGirl]

But this is a misunderstanding of reasonable doubt. The jury is not to examine whether it is reasonable for casey to have done what the state is accusing her of. Almost no murder is reasonable.

Instead, the jury is asked to determine if there can be any reasonable doubt that casey did what she is accused of, not whether what she may have done was reasonable or not. There is a huge difference.

I could be wrong, but I think the OP was just highlighting the way the word reasonable can be applied to different scenarios, and used in different context. The OP had a good point that what meets the standard of reasonable doubt is subjective.