If you agree or disagree with the verdict, let us know why

[Kyle323]

I do agree that the questions you provided above aren't truly relevant questions because the purse had nothing to do with Caylee's body, the crime scene wasn't a frequently traveled place during the summer, the shovel showed it had nothing to do with a crime, etc.

But, my question was in regards to the tape, the tape that was found with Caylee's body. If she did use that tape prior to death, after death, to apply to Caylee's mouth/nose.... why would she leave such incriminating evidence behind in her house. And, where was this tape kept... In GA's locked shed or in his garage. And finally, what luck GA happened to have to stumble upon this roll of duct tape and proceed to use it throughout the time of investigation until it is completely gone. No way to trace the tape to anything. Casey must've had a great plan going for her dad to grab the murder weapon and use it up before LE found out.

It would've been a heck of a lot worse for Casey if she took the duct tape and left it in her car!! In that case, when they found the body and noted that the duct tape found in her car, as you had suggested she should've put it, matched the duct tape found at the crime scene it looks especially bad!!

Duct tape is not a commonly used murder weapon like a knife - it's a household handyman item!! No need to dispose of it, although in a perfect crime she would have. But there were many stupid things she did....among them - try not to act so happy by partying it up in the immediate days after your child goes missing or "drowns in a pool accident".

George using the duct tape to hang flyers was merely a quirk of this case - how was anyone to know that they would find duct tape on a body at some time in the future?!

 

[sacrablue]

This post was in response to a post regarding pictures showing Casey's pictures at the anything but clothes party of her lifestyle and the after pictures of her partying as the result of her wanting to be free of Caylee and finally being able to be free. My post stated that if you were going to consider those pictures as proof, you should include all of the other pictures of Casey/Caylee as proof also. I just feel that is the morally correct thing to do if you're basing your assumptions on pictures. MOO though.

Just out of curiosity, were you a grief counselor?

It is someone that knows human behavior, you know when there is an accident and your child drowns so good time to rent a movie and party. That sort of thing.

 

[beccalecca1]

With all due respect, IMO you misinterpret the law. Yes there are a lot of unanswered questions but the when, where, and how questions do not have to be answered to convict beyond a reasonable doubt.

The what and the who questions are the only ones that matter. As we have seen from other posts we disagree with the meaning of the evidence on the trunk, the duct tape, and Casey's behavior. These help answer the what and the who question. We can continue to debate these but I don't see us getting anywhere.

For me the trunk evidence shows beyond any doubt that Caylee's decomposing body was in Casey's trunk. This cannot be reasonably explained except by manslaughter or murder by Casey. Dogs don't lie, they are trained not to make mistakes, and they are not biased in favor of the defense or the prosecution.

The questions included the who and what, and if you can't answer who, what, when, where, and how... you don't have a case.

 

[RR0004]

I won't disagree but others had mentioned that you need to answer what exactly did she do to cause child neglect. Obviously the law isn't clear that simply not reporting your child missing = child neglect (thus the petitions for Caylee's Law) so what did she do that caused child neglect then? They already found her not guilty of actually murdering her child.

Lost her child for a period of 31 days? Didn't care to find her?
I obviously didn't find a shred of truth in the DT's opening statement...other than Ms. Anthony is a liar.

 

[beccalecca1]

The DT did not need to prove the theory they presented. But, lacking any evidence to support KC's innocence, they had to present a theory deflecting blame away from KC and on to someone else. (And as they had no evidence, the only place to present it was in the OS.) They picked GA because he was the last to see Caylee alive with KC. They threw in the molestation accusation to make him an unsympathetic, despicable character. They created the GA scapegoat with no evidence whatsoever and yet 12 people fell for it. It's really quite amazing, and sad and tragic too.

That's why when folks go on about the SA's supposed lack of evidence, many of us shake our heads in disbelief.

BBM

Do you have anything to back up what was bolded? I feel this is speculation. I haven't seen anything to show the defense made these stories up. Nothing.

 

[Silkprint]

I feel the verdict was wrong
Not going to state all the reasons that have already been said dozens of times better than I could .

 

[RR0004]

The questions included the who and what, and if you can't answer who, what, when, where, and how... you don't have a case.

I don't think that's the intent of the law. Circumstantial evidence (including DNA) is to be considered. You have the last person to be seen alive with Caylee (by Casey's DT's admission as well)- it's the interpretation of the other evidence that serves as "proof" or perhaps, not.

 

[Silkprint]

I obviously didn't find a shred of truth in the DT's opening statement...other than Ms. Anthony is a liar.

That's the only thing the defense said that I believed by the way

 

[cuppy199]

BBM

Do you have anything to back up what was bolded? I feel this is speculation. I haven't seen anything to show the defense made these stories up. Nothing.

The reason you didnt see anything to back up it up is because the DT doesn't have to prove it so they used speculation to sway the jury.

 

[Kyle323]

The questions included the who and what, and if you can't answer who, what, when, where, and how... you don't have a case.

Please read this link:

http://www.newsmax.com/RonaldKessle...Anthony-GretaVanSusteren/2011/07/13/id/403503

 

[RR0004]

BBM

Do you have anything to back up what was bolded? I feel this is speculation. I haven't seen anything to show the defense made these stories up. Nothing.

Well, JP obviously did which is the reason the DT couldn't refer to any of their own theories (or speculation) in their closing.

 

[beccalecca1]

No.. it didn't. Watching the actual video I don't think there was a hint of jest in JBP suggestion. It was continuing the reach for bodies imo.

I have to give you credit though, being in the minority opinion on this and coming forward to back yours. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Many of us may not understand or comprehend opposing views.

OT: I've never been accused of lacking tenacity

At this point in jury selection, HHJP was tired of having to sit through questioning jurors, dismissing jurors, the DT claiming they didn't have enough minority. So, he found out that there is a lot of the minority population in the local homeless shelter and offered that up. I think it was in jest and a way to bring light to the DT with their dismissing jurors. HHJP, IMO, was trying to send the message that he wasn't playing around, we're finding a jury and we're swearing them in. No more delays in this trial.

Now, my only offer of evidence of the "in jest" part is that although JB stated he wanted to verify there was people available with ID's, none of these people were brought to court.

(I did think though that HHJP did address this in court the next day or a few days later that it wasn't going to be necessary to go to that extent, he wasn't saying that literally.. or something along those lines.)

 

[annalia]

BBM

Do you have anything to back up what was bolded? I feel this is speculation. I haven't seen anything to show the defense made these stories up. Nothing.

HUH? How do you prove a negative?

have you seen anything that proved George molested Casey?

It is a FACT that there wasn't one shred of evidence that Casey was ever molested by George. As a matter of fact, it was stated that the only time casey ever mentioned molestation it was pertaining to Lee. The defense did exactly what the poster stated, put George on trial with unfounded and unproven accustations to deflect from casey and the jury bought it all, hook, line and sinker.

JMHO

 

[beccalecca1]

It would've been a heck of a lot worse for Casey if she took the duct tape and left it in her car!! In that case, when they found the body and noted that the duct tape found in her car, as you had suggested she should've put it, matched the duct tape found at the crime scene it looks especially bad!!

Duct tape is not a commonly used murder weapon like a knife - it's a household handyman item!! No need to dispose of it, although in a perfect crime she would have. But there were many stupid things she did....among them - try not to act so happy by partying it up in the immediate days after your child goes missing or "drowns in a pool accident".

George using the duct tape to hang flyers was merely a quirk of this case - how was anyone to know that they would find duct tape on a body at some time in the future?!

I was suggesting why wouldn't Casey take the tape and DUMP it with the body, out in the swamp (where all incriminating evidence would deteriorate with everything else).

 

[Sustained]

The questions included the who and what, and if you can't answer who, what, when, where, and how... you don't have a case.

Sorry, there have been many convictions w/o knowing the when, where, or how ... I like to use Scott Petersen, but look up the case of missing girl Carrie Culberson and the convicted murderer Vincent Doan.

 

[beccalecca1]

It is someone that knows human behavior, you know when there is an accident and your child drowns so good time to rent a movie and party. That sort of thing.

I'm sorry, I didn't ask what a grief counselor was. I was curious if you were a grief counselor. ( you stated that you worked a lot with grief )

If that's asking a personal question, no need to answer. I understand.

 

[beccalecca1]

I don't think that's the intent of the law. Circumstantial evidence (including DNA) is to be considered. You have the last person to be seen alive with Caylee (by Casey's DT's admission as well)- it's the interpretation of the other evidence that serves as "proof" or perhaps, not.

By DT's admission, GA and Casey were the last to be with Caylee alive.

If that theory was how the law was intended, if I was out partying with a friend and they disappeared after we said our goodbye's, then later were found murdered... wouldn't that mean I was guilty?

 

[beccalecca1]

The reason didnt see anything to back up it up is because the DT doesn't have to prove it. Everything the DT said was speculation with no fact to back them up.

So, it's ok to speculate that the defense isn't telling the truth, but if we are to question the prosecution we better have facts to back it up? Am I understanding that correctly?

 

[RR0004]

I have to say that I really couldn't bring myself to talk about the verdict because there really are no words to describe how wrong I think it was. But, one thing I have to say, the little I have heard from the jurors makes me ill. I feel terrible that the fate of a little girl's justice was left in the hands of...to be nice...totally clueless individuals...clueless in that they didn't, IMO, have any understanding of the law.

 

[Littleone48]

You realize, I hope, that the defense can ALWAYS find some paid "expert" to refute the prosecution's? This doesn't men that the two sides should cancel each other out on the forensics.

A "grief expert"?! This is where common sense must come into play. Do you know of anyone, or have you ever heard of anyone, who parties, carries on, shops, etc. after their child dies - even if that were in an accident? 100% of mothers don't act that way....unless of course they're happy that their child is gone.

Well I know of 2 who went over the edge after their child died. 1 happened to be a swimming pool accident (back in the 70's) and the other one was a car accident. Both women went out of control almost immediatly.

One was drinking daily/nightly, sleeping with anyone who would have her and at the funeral she looked like she was having a really good time....4 years later she killed herself...

The 2nd one happened to be married but showed no grief at all. She cleaned out the room and made it into a den 2 weeks after the accident, she would take down the pictures daily and her husband would put them back up. She was sporting the most expensive clothing you could buy and she refused to go to the grave. It wasn't until her husband threatened to leave her that the truth was discovered. They were 1000's of dollars in debt but the biggest thing was she agreed to counciling and it was then that she pulled out her journal. The one she had been writing in since the day after the funeral to her son that died..the one that she thought was still alive...It's been about 4 years now and she is getting better. She's even thinking about having another baby but it was a tough tough road for her.

Everyone mourns different. It does happen and I thank God everyday that I never had to go through something like that.