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

[WillChgo]

The main faultline I see between those here who after carefully examining the evidence, support the not guilty verdict and those who don't, is their belief that it was not proven BARD that Caylee's decomposing body was in Casey's trunk, versus those like myself who believe the evidence was overwhelming.

Another faultline between the two camps is whether you believe that Casey's behavior is strong evidence of guilt, or those who believe that it doesn't prove anything.

Finally, those who support the not guilty verdict focus on the many unanswered questions in the case, which for some means reasonable doubt. Those who believe that Casey was guilty BARD, acknowledge unanswered questions, but rely instead on interpreting the pattern of evidence that is available.

Collectively the participants in this thread would constitute a hung jury.

While I still believe that Casey was guilty of 1st degree murder, BARD, I respect the dedication and thought-provoking questions provided by those who agree with the jury's verdict.

I still cannot respect the jury. Unlike many supporters of the not guilty verdict here, the jurors, through their interviews, did not indicate careful deliberation of the evidence nor understanding of the law.

 

[logicalgirl]

With all due respect to those who agree with the verdict ...

I feel that verdicts like this make it plain as day to the prospective murderer/killer that if you hide the body until it's skeletonized with no traceable DNA/fingerprints, no one sees you do it, and deflect attention onto others around you, you will be acquitted. It doesn't matter if your post-killing behavior shows a consciousness of guilt, or you lie to police/friends/family, or you drive around with a dead body in your car, you avoid your parents for 31 days until they catch up to you, or if dump your own flesh and blood in woods for animals to chew on.

Call it anger, call it lack of evidence, call it whatever you like ... I call it a dangerous precedent.

And call it folks who are unable to concentrate on and digest simple scientific evidence and like picture charts instead...

 

[beccalecca1]

With all due respect to those who agree with the verdict ...

I feel that verdicts like this make it plain as day to the prospective murderer/killer that if you hide the body until it's skeletonized with no traceable DNA/fingerprints, no one sees you do it, and deflect attention onto others around you, you will be acquitted. It doesn't matter if your post-killing behavior shows a consciousness of guilt, or you lie to police/friends/family, or you drive around with a dead body in your car, you avoid your parents for 31 days until they catch up to you, or if dump your own flesh and blood in woods for animals to chew on.

Call it anger, call it lack of evidence, call it whatever you like ... I call it a dangerous precedent.

With all due respect, I don't think this is new news to the killers in our society. That is why they try to hide bodies, deflect, hide evidence, destroy evidence, etc etc.

I don't believe this verdict is setting any precedent, society and killers are still they way they always were before. They do their crime, hide their crime, and get away with their crime (until they are caught of course, then we have trials if they want to plead not guilty).

 

[beccalecca1]

That is NOT what happens to chloroform. Some of the formula evaporates and those that didn't stay in the carpet. Chloroform does not "dry" into a powder...:floorlaugh: cause if it did - it could be sold as such - chlorform tablets.....:great:

:floorlaugh:

The question was directed to the trash that was dried in the evidence room.

Chloroform tablets... :crazy:

 

[RANCH]

Furthermore, if we were going to refer to your clothing... when they were wet they had at least the molecular compound H2O in them, after drying they do not have that (possibly amongst other chemicals that were in your water but dissipated when dried).

Yes. Just like the trash/garbage.H2O is gone after drying.I guess any volatile chemicals in the trash/garbage would evaporate.

 

[beccalecca1]

Yes. Just like the trash/garbage.H2O is gone after drying.I guess any volatile chemicals in the trash/garbage would evaporate.

Chemicals are altered, H2O evaporates, possible other volatile chemicals evaporate, etc etc.

After drying, you are not dealing with the same substance that you would be dealing with before drying.



You could have had hydrogen chemicals and oxygen chemicals from other products that bonded to form the water that made the trash wet. Therefore, even in the wet stages, those chemicals were altered (bonded with other chemicals) to create new chemical compositions. Then, when dried, the oxygen detaches from the hydrogen and dissipates into the air, and I believe (I could be wrong though because it's been a few years since taking college chemistry) hydrogen could also dissipate into the air once the bond is broken and there isn't another compound to bond to.

 

[Baznme]

The story that CFCA was afraid of her parents flies completely out the window when you consider that for months she had been stealing money from her mother's account as was still living at home, and the final nail is watching her talk to her parents in the jail videos. We see temper tantrums, foul language, impatience, disrespect, a condescending manner, jeering at their tears, but we never see fear.

ITA - Those without a conscience don't have fear. How many nights did she sleep in that house after she had been bailed out KNOWING her child was in that swamp at the end of the street decomposing.

 

[WillChgo]

I never said she wasn't guilty. That's the misconception that everyone makes. Just because some people don't feel that it was proven that she murdered Caylee doesn't mean we automatically believe she is not guilty, but the second anyone questions any of the evidence that the SA presented, it’s assumed that the person thinks she's innocent. I said I didn't feel that the SA proved chloroform was used; it doesn't mean I don't think that Casey was somehow responsible for Caylee's death.

What charge do you believe she is guilty of? Why?
Or do you believe she is guilty but just not proven?

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

This is getting comical.

I was specifically referring to GA in my post. He got to the bottom of her jobs, so I don't know why he would take the back burner on this when this is his previous line of work.

What does one have to do with the other? Did he run out to Sports Authority the second he had an inkling? Did he not ever try to get to the bottom of the car smell? This is a very thin reed to hang anything on.

And, after CA went to work and came home, she attempted to get ahold of Casey. Casey didnt' answer the phone. Wouldn't panic set in at that point? Wouldn't someone get that "sunken" feeling, smelling a dead body and your daughter isn't answering the phone? I think I would.

For the last time (I wish), Cindy had been talking to her everyday. The car was in the yard for two weeks. There's no way it could be Casey based on the undeniable facts they had at the time. Once again, there is no way it could have been Casey's dead body. There wasn't even a body there anyway. The trunk was opened. They knew there was no dead body in the car at the time.

Whether the smell could have been a lingering smell from bodily fluids deposited by Caylee's corpse that was being driven around town for days would have been a difficult leap at that time (many pro-acquittal people still don't believe that). Cindy was of the belief Casey kept Caylee away from her out of spite. She wasn't thinking anything happened to Caylee. The virtually unfathomable idea that their daughter would have been carrying her own daughter's dead body in her car would have been very difficult to come to terms with. It seems Cindy still can't.

What the smell likely meant to them at that point was that she got into some bad situation involving her many unknown friends. That's apparently why George was following and investigating her friends and Cindy was accusing her friends for long afterwards.

It's remarkable to hear that the fact nobody called 911 when Caylee was dying means nothing toward Casey's guilt, but that George not calling 911 because of a smell proves everything about him. The logic is inconsistent.

 

[Sustained]

Snipped

I disagree. I feel that the justice system is in place to show that if you cannot explain your case to a lay person, then it's not black and white that someone committed a crime. Just my :twocents:

But if lay people don't understand that punishment is not to be considered during deliberations or that they need to make inferences when a trial is solely contested on circumstantial evidence, is it truly a "justice" system ?

 

[Baxter]

I wanted to post this earlier but didn't.

It is really hard to have a real debate on this case if there is nothing anyone of us can agree on. One interpretation of the evidence is rebutted by an opposite interpretation of the evidence. One belief of something in evidence is rebutted by an opposing belief that this is not evidence. Etc Etc.


Is there anything in this case that everyone agrees on?

Your trying to get people to agree on evidence that was not there.

JA opened up all of the food containers that were empty.
THERE WAS NO FOOD
Where did the food go that you say was there?
Where is the mush you speak of?
These containers are closed.
I have 3 boys, 2 college, 1 high school. When I throw away anything, it is just the wrappers.

 

[HatesSociopaths]

The main faultline I see between those here who after carefully examining the evidence, support the not guilty verdict and those who don't, is their belief that it was not proven BARD that Caylee's decomposing body was in Casey's trunk, versus those like myself who believe the evidence was overwhelming.

Another faultline between the two camps is whether you believe that Casey's behavior is strong evidence of guilt, or those who believe that it doesn't prove anything.

Finally, those who support the not guilty verdict focus on the many unanswered questions in the case, which for some means reasonable doubt. Those who believe that Casey was guilty BARD, acknowledge unanswered questions, but rely instead on interpreting the pattern of evidence that is available.

Collectively the participants in this thread would constitute a hung jury.

While I still believe that Casey was guilty of 1st degree murder, BARD, I respect the dedication and thought-provoking questions provided by those who agree with the jury's verdict.

I still cannot respect the jury. Unlike many supporters of the not guilty verdict here, the jurors, through their interviews, did not indicate careful deliberation of the evidence nor understanding of the law.

Good post.

I am curious if the participants in this thread could have found a compromise with finding her guilty of the manslaughter of a child charge, which carries a max 30 year sentence.

 

[Sustained]

I just took some laundry out of the dryer and it reminded me of something.Baez claimed that the OCSO CSI destroyed evidence by putting the trash/garbage in a dry room.My clothes are now dry but not destroyed.Was Baez right or wrong in his claim?

Evidence drying is standard CSI practice in the process of preserving possible DNA evidence for shipment for further testing.

 

[MissJames]

Yes I'm serious.Does removing moisture from trash/garbage destroy evidence? I think that's what Baez claimed.

Drying it out was a way to preserve the evidence,not destroy it.

 

[annalia]

ITA - Those without a conscience don't have fear. How many nights did she sleep in that house after she had been bailed out KNOWING her child was in that swamp at the end of the street decomposing.

It was just her way of grieving "differently". :maddening:

 

[beccalecca1]

This is getting comical.



What does one have to do with the other? Did he run out to Sports Authority the second he had an inkling? Did he not ever try to get to the bottom of the car smell? This is a very thin reed to hang anything on.


This one example isn't the only time GA went into detective mode on Casey. After the Sports Authority incident, he also followed what he thought was Casey in her mother's car because he wanted to see what she was doing. After Casey was thrown into jail he went into a 6 week long (IIRC) investigation following RM, TL, and JG around (none of the A's knew he was doing this). He stated in his depo that he would've followed AH around also, but he felt that he was getting too closely involved at that point. So I reiterate my post, why wouldn't he go into detective mode when he thought he smelled a dead body in his daughters trunk, no matter who's dead body it was. Even if it wasn't Caylee, or he didn't think it was Caylee or Casey, why wouldn't he at least investigate who was the dead person in his daughter's trunk?

For the last time (I wish), Cindy had been talking to her everyday. The car was in the yard for two weeks. There's no way it could be Casey based on the undeniable facts they had at the time. Once again, there is no way it could have been Casey's dead body. There wasn't even a body there anyway. The trunk was opened. They knew there was no dead body in the car at the time. I didn't specifically say it could have been Casey in the trunk. Neither Cindy or George had talked to or saw their granddaughter for a month prior to this, and they both were missing her terribly. This is the same granddaughter that lived in their house with them for every day of her life prior to this. They hadn't seen/heard from her, there's a dead body smell in the trunk, and you go to work to discuss it with others before you take action? It just doesn't add up to me.

Whether the smell could have been a lingering smell from bodily fluids deposited by Caylee's corpse that was being driven around town for days would have been a difficult leap at that time (many pro-acquittal people still don't believe that). Cindy was of the belief Casey kept Caylee away from her out of spite. She wasn't thinking anything happened to Caylee. The virtually unfathomable idea that their daughter would have been carrying her own daughter's dead body in her car would have been very difficult to come to terms with. It seems Cindy still can't.

What the smell likely meant to them at that point was that she got into some bad situation involving her many unknown friends.

And even with that scenario, Casey got into a bad situation involving her many unknown friends, AND the fact that her daughter is with her, wouldn't that cause enough reason for concern to immediately go find your daughter and granddaughter to make sure they're safe and get them BOTH out of the "bad situation"? I'm just having a hard time buying that someone stumbles upon their daughters car in a towyard and the car smells like death, yet you drive the car home, try to clean the car (get rid of the smell, whatever), take the time to take out the belongings in the car to wash them, then go to work. You do nothing more with the situation until your coworkers tell you you should be concerned. Why wouldn't any mother/grandmother/father/grandfather be concerned before this??? They needed confirmation from outsiders before they felt there was a need for it?

That's apparently why George was following and investigating her friends and Cindy was accusing her friends for long afterwards.

It's remarkable to hear that the fact nobody called 911 when Caylee was dying means nothing toward Casey's guilt, but that George not calling 911 because of a smell proves everything about him. The logic is inconsistent.

Responses in red.

 

[MissJames]

The main faultline I see between those here who after carefully examining the evidence, support the not guilty verdict and those who don't, is their belief that it was not proven BARD that Caylee's decomposing body was in Casey's trunk, versus those like myself who believe the evidence was overwhelming.

Another faultline between the two camps is whether you believe that Casey's behavior is strong evidence of guilt, or those who believe that it doesn't prove anything.

Finally, those who support the not guilty verdict focus on the many unanswered questions in the case, which for some means reasonable doubt. Those who believe that Casey was guilty BARD, acknowledge unanswered questions, but rely instead on interpreting the pattern of evidence that is available.

Collectively the participants in this thread would constitute a hung jury.

While I still believe that Casey was guilty of 1st degree murder, BARD, I respect the dedication and thought-provoking questions provided by those who agree with the jury's verdict.

I still cannot respect the jury. Unlike many supporters of the not guilty verdict here, the jurors, through their interviews, did not indicate careful deliberation of the evidence nor understanding of the law.

If I may add another component : I also sense distrust of LE and the SA's from some who feel the verdict was correct.
I personally have no respect for the DT and will be happy to list all the reasons why ,if needed. Give me a few days and I'll even supply links and videos (there's a lot).

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

More fascinating logic.

He had a choice, he could've even lied to CA saying he wgoing to work and attempted to find Casey himself.

The phone records show he made no attempt to get ahold of Casey, which I'm sure he could've done from his cell on his way to work. But, he made no attempts.

Except in the "Casey drowned and nobody killed her" theory, George is supposed to be complicit in covering it up. If so, why wouldn't he warn Casey about it at that point to get their stories straight? He has a good reason to call her if he was involved, but still no call. Why would he even go pick up the car at all if he knew about the smell, which he would have to known about? He went to the post office alone. He could have made up a story to Cindy about what the notice was about. He could have picked up the car by himself at some other time.

On the one hand, the theory goes George should call 911, because he's Mr. ex-cop. On the other, he's a bungling idiot ex-cop spearheading the pointless cover-up of an accidental death, and who not only leaves a neon sign at that dump site 20 feet from the road that connects it to their house, but who also willingly leads his wife to the Pontiac hearse of death.

Once again, Caylee's innocence only fits when you look at it the evidence narrowly in small pieces and ignore the rest of the evidence.

 

[beccalecca1]

But if lay people don't understand that punishment is not to be considered during deliberations or that they need to make inferences when a trial is solely contested on circumstantial evidence, is it truly a "justice" system ?

Just because a small number of jury members came forward to talk doesn't mean that is what all the jurors felt. Just because the jury members did speak about how hard it was to take someone life based on what the State's case was, doesn't mean that was what was discussed during deliberations. They are allowed to have their opinions outside of the deliberation room, right?

 

[beccalecca1]

Your trying to get people to agree on evidence that was not there.

JA opened up all of the food containers that were empty.
THERE WAS NO FOOD
Where did the food go that you say was there?
Where is the mush you speak of?
These containers are closed.
I have 3 boys, 2 college, 1 high school. When I throw away anything, it is just the wrappers.

There was evidence there, the pictures in reference to the drowning theory were submitted into evidence, but I've seen posts of stating the opposite.

The mush/puddle I speak of dried up in the dry room.

Your experience with your boys shouldn't equate to the habits of the boys (and Casey) that lived in that apartment. And, I'm sure everyone finds spoiled food in their fridge once in a while and throws it out. It is certainly possible this was the case and I don't believe that is too far fetched to believe that. These "boys" partied and went to school every night, and one of these "boys" commented on how nice it was to have Casey around because she cooked for them. Since they weren't always there to eat her cooking, it is not illogical to think there was food thrown away.