Is Casey Anthony Possibly Innocent?

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Could have been the man in the moon taking care of Caylee, the thing is, ICA shirked her responsibility as a mother for the good life, the Bella Vita. The thing is, there is no problem with someone going out and having a good time for themselves while the child is being watched by whomever, the thing is, ICA stayed away for long lengths of time without anybody seeing her daughter after June 12. By all rights, Caylee should have been with her mother at Blockbuster, if the guy didn't care for children, ICA should have been saying Adios to him, nothing replaces your child.
 
Ok good point, I think that helps my timeline in fact, I will revise that.

I don't know when ICA told AH about the smell, if it was by her father's words via a phone call or if she just made it up and blamed him, but surely not. She had to have smelled the odor when she ran out of gas on the 27 at least. Lies too much.
 
I am not totally convinced KC did this alone. I also am not convinced she killed Caylee on purpose. I also am not convinced of how much involvement CA , GA and LA have. I have read everything and watched all the videos and audios that have been released under the Sunshine Laws.

First of all being a local and living on the same side of town there were some things people didn't see. When Caylee was first reported missing, the first thing the A's did were to sit up a table at Publix on Lake Underhill and Chickasaw Trail for donations for help in finding Caylee. There were also flyers posted inside the store at every checkout with Caylee's picture and asking for donations. And let's not forget when GA and LA posted on Myspace looking for a admin to work for free.

Because of complaints that Publix received there was a tent set up in the parking lot of another Publix at Chickasaw and Curryford. This tent lasted a few weeks until complaints shut it down and they moved again and again and again until they finally set up the last time where they had the "Meet and Greet" all the while collecting donations to help in the aid of finding Caylee. The Milsteads, I believe didn't get involved until the 2nd Publix location and the donations kept rolling in.

I have said this before and will again "Follow the Money" This is mo and mine alone. I believe in the beginning it could have been a fake kidnapping in order to make money and it all got out of hand. The A's have lied so much, how much can we really believe? GA works, he doesn't work, CA is the only one that's had a long time job. KC didn't work and it goes on and on.

KC calls home and CA says "you don't know what my involvement is sweetheart". The jailhouse video, KC says, "don't worry I haven't told them anything"

Also, we have the foundation that was set up by CA.

I just don't buy it. I guess what it boils down to for me is could this have been a scam that got way out of hand?

I guess when the SA lays it all out and we see what the DT has to say then it will be more clearer.

Regardless of what happened and how it happened Caylee needs Justice.

Sorry to ramble, but this has been on my mind a lot lately.

With respect, I think you have that backwards...

CA said to ICA, "I don't know what your involvement is, sweetheart"

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,392201,00.html
 
Casey is a compulsive writer. I always wondered if she left something in writing after Caylee died.

I believe her diary of days, where she writes I have no regrets, just a little worried....

"I have no regrets, just a bit worried,"
"I completely trust my own judgment I know that I made the right decision.
I just hope that the end justifies the means."
"This is the happiest that I have been in a very long time."

JMHO


Justice for Caylee
 
According to ICA, the last time she saw Caylee was June 16th, between 9am and 1pm, when she allegedly dropped her off at the invisinanny's Sawgrass Apartment #210...which had been empty for 142 days...not to mention, LE was never able to track down this alleged nanny...so, going off the premise of the last day ICA allegedly last seen an alive Caylee, June 16th, 2008 is the date of demise...JMHO

Justice for Caylee

Well, we know that's a lie as well. How could she be at Sawgrass between 9 a.m. and 1 p.m. when her dad said they left out of the house about 1 p.m. ? Then her cell phone pings show she didn't start moving around until 4 ish that day. I'm still amazed about the whole Sawgrass thing myself. How she ever got that name and a lady shows up with the same name. Was she really scoping in those 31 days, to find a person to blame all this on? Think the answer is yes.
 
Well, we know that's a lie as well. How could she be at Sawgrass between 9 a.m. and 1 p.m. when her dad said they left out of the house about 1 p.m. ? Then her cell phone pings show she didn't start moving around until 4 ish that day. I'm still amazed about the whole Sawgrass thing myself. How she ever got that name and a lady shows up with the same name. Was she really scoping in those 31 days, to find a person to blame all this on? Think the answer is yes.

I don't believe GA saw them....it's been said, in ICA's lies, lies some truth...so, I'm thinking June 16th, as the State is using...by the time she was seen in Block Buster, Caylee must have already met her demise...JMHO

Justice for Caylee
 
I am sort of leaning, like some of you, towards the idea that someone else is involved, I dont want to name names or 'plan b' (ever watch the old tv show The Practice lol) anyone but I dont think CA is alone in all of this, someone else either took part in the cover up assuming the death was an accident or themselves had a direct hand in the the child's death in some way or another.


I would like to expand on this idea but I really dont know where to start and I dont know how cool it is to start naming names and accusing people of murder.

BBM

Not cool at all. As to her having help, IMO, if KC had had help in this, Caylee would not have been dumped down the street, around the corner, 15 feet off the road. Only KC is that lazy. Anyone else would have actually taken the time to try and get rid of the body so that it would never be found and most definately not have left the plethora of items that connects back to the Anthony home with the body. Jmo, of course.
 
I'm going to play devil's advocate, although I shouldn't. But some might say that the child of a parent who doesn't care, can die accidentally or due to neglect and that the parent of such a child would not show normal, human emotion or motherly instinct at such a time because they don't possess it.

However, that scenario does not explain why such a parent would risk the death penalty rather than admit to an accident or neglect.



I am confused. Maybe I missed something but what anonymous phone call are you referring to? Thank you!!!!!!!



I believe that the family was and remains very dysfunctional. I believe that casey received horrible dichotomous messages from her mother, mostly and that her father was an ineffectual, generally passive parent, who sometimes tried to intervene but was shouted down by stronger personalities in the house.

I think casey was told, growing up, that she was a princess and perfect, could do no wrong and that anyone who dared criticize her was stupid, ignorant and lying. However, that message was reserved for anything that possibly related to acts on casey's part that "outsiders" could see, or when the family image was threatened by casey's behavior or outsider opinions. At such times, Cindy reared up in a protective mode and in fierce, illogical denial, goes my theory.

But the other message I surmise casey received was one from her pathologically enmeshed mother who saw casey as she secretly saw herself, and who desired to punish casey in order to destroy that which she hated about herself and which she secretly felt she was. That message was that casey was a very bad little girl, who always made mistakes, who was lazy, a liar, and later, a bad mother and who needed to be totally controlled by her own devoted mother to avoid catastrophe.

I believe this because I have watched them very closely and have experience with families that are similar, unfortunately. Anyhow the result of being raised with such dichotomous messages? I believe the result is a person who is initially vain and narcissistic, while at the same time self-loathing and terrified of her mother, of disappointing said mother and being shamed.

But it does not end there. Because people grow and learn from their experience and from casey's experiences she learned first how to lie and then that she had to lie and after that, that if she lied about something that her mother felt could shame the family name, the lies would be believed and supported. So casey became free, in a sense, of her mother's control. She grew to realize that she could do anything and if it could possibly be a source of embarrassment to Cindy, Cindy would help her to cover it up and would back off if casey's tantrums threatened to reveal the truth about the family.

And as casey grew older and realized that she had this type of control over her mother, the rage she had long suppressed from fear or a sense of powerless, at the angry, controlling parent who had unfairly "punished" her all her life and who she felt continued to do so in sick, little psychological ways, like taking over her baby, being the first to hold the child, even before casey, replacing the princess casey with the princess Caylee and further ruining casey's life by using the child as an instrument to make "unfair" demands on casey, like that she had to get a job or care for her own kid, and using the "greatest mistake" of casey's life to continue to try to shackle and control her, well, that rage transformed her narcissism and lying into something much more pathological and a sociopathic monster was born.

Is this sociopathic monster the quivering child full of confusion and fear of her wrathful mother that casey likely used to be at one time? Just listen to her calls from jail to home. Listen and watch the jail visits. Listen to witness testimony about how she talked about and treated her parents. Listen to witness testimony about how she reacted to them and how they deferred to her, not even daring to bring Caylee's name up when she was released from jail. I think once you do that you will see that the quivering child was replaced by a diabolical human being who learned how to manipulate the sick family she came from and who turned the tables, changing from the one who was afraid to the one who caused the fear in that household. :twocents:





I don't think she suddenly "snapped" and decided to chloroform her daughter. I think she planned it for some time and when certain things came to a head, decided, possibly somewhat rashly at that moment, that she had had enough, that time had finally come and that killing Caylee was the answer to all her problems. One doesn't research, make and use chloroform when they "snap".

Also, again, if it was an accident, why didn't casey ever admit to such, while in jail for almost three years and charged for first degree murder and facing the death penalty? That makes no sense to me. The investigators practically begged casey to admit to an accident. Her attorneys well knew that if they called the state and had one of those conversations that attorneys do, stating "Listen, let's say this was an accident. Let's say we are going to put casey on the stand to state just that. I think we can get a jury to believe that. What do you have to offer us?", they would have gotten a reception, is my bet. IMO, that conversation never happened. Why? Because it wasn't an accident.

~~~~Bolded by me


I don't think that I have ever made a post on here stating, quite simply, "Bravo!" but I am doing so right now.

In partiicular, the paragraph that I respectfully bolded above deserves a standing ovation.
 
None of these alternative theories makes any sense. It is very clear that CA and GA loved Caylee very much, with all the photos and videos we have seen. Now, add to this the anguished cry of a grandmother looking for her absent precious granddaughter in Cindy's myspace post. This does not add up, and its clear to me that CA and GA had no idea what truly happened, prior to July 15th.

Jose is the true villain here. He raced in to their home, shut ICA up immediately, and told Cindy to save Casey, she must start "spinning" ASAP. Cindy jumped on that train quickly because she did indeed fear she would "loose another one". The stories and erratic behavior came after that. Jose, in the meantime was instrumental in separating ICA from her parents as much as possible.. keeping the truth tucked away for his starring moment (Tuesday). There can be no other guilty party in the murder of Caylee.
 
I don't believe GA saw them....it's been said, in ICA's lies, lies some truth...so, I'm thinking June 16th, as the State is using...by the time she was seen in Block Buster, Caylee must have already met her demise...JMHO

Justice for Caylee

I don't think he saw them either. I also have a hard time when GA says he peeked in and saw Caylee alseep on ICA's bed on Jun 15, but ICA wasn't home at that time. Did she come in and have an argument then leave again? CA said ICA came in when the sun was starting to go down, then we have ICA coming home way later in the evening per GA words and cell pings. Too many lies.
 
Hi all,

I don't post very often, but (like many of us here) I've been following this case since the start, and this thread's surprising title intrigued me.

When the "tot mom" saga first came to light, I initially believed there was no way Casey could have done this alone. Casey, like many young people in their early 20s, seems incapable of doing anything by herself. The constant texting, phone calls, overnight visits, partying, etc...I know most young people are the same way, but Casey in particular seems to need constant contact with others. (Then I thought, that's probably why she DID do it; her child was forcing her to be different from others, to not fit in the group, etc.)

Anyway, I had a few doubts at the beginning because I couldn't imagine a socially-minded twentysomething being able to hatch a plan (even a shortsighted, spontaneous plan) on her own. Once Casey's sociopathy came to light, though, it became clear that that's how she operates: keeping things to herself in order to advance her parasitic, hedonistic personal life agenda.

That being said, I think the cumulative evidence in this case, including Casey's behavior before, during, and after the 31 days, leaves zero room for reasonable doubt. Theoretical doubt, perhaps -- for example, theoretically, Caylee could have been abducted by aliens. Theoretically, she could have been "zapped" into the future by some yet-unknown life force. Theoretically, the dingo ate Casey's baby, maybe. However, even though these things (as well as more mundane explanations, i.e. "George did it" or "it was a complete accident"") *may* have happened, they are overwhelmingly not likely given what we know.

I know this echoes what many of you have stated already, so please excuse my redundancy. Basically I think that yes, there certainly is doubt...but, like the players in this whole case, none of it (given what we know) is reasonable.

:tyou: SheRa

This says how I feel, exactly. If we are speaking about Casey being "legally" guilty-we can't know that until the trial is over. :dunno: That is why we are having a trial and why we just got done picking a jury.

:cow:
 
Before the body was found, I thought that Caylee had diead in some tragic accident as the result of KC's negligence. I've always had a hard time believing that KC, as undereducated as she is, possesses the ability to successfully manufacture chloroform. I think that her internet searches for "how to make chloroform" are probably a result of her seeing that stupid cartoon on Ricardo's myspace, "Win her over with chloroform," and that she was unfamiliar with the term and simply googled it to get the joke. Under circumstances of accidental death due to negligence, she would certainly be guilty, but of a far lesser charge. But when the body was discovered with the duct tape, that seemed to shoot down that theory once and for all. The duct tape - to me - implies both intent to kill and premeditation. I don't see any way around that with the placement of the duct tape, sadly.
 
The baby may not have been dead yet, CA may have thought she was just asleep in car/chloroformed, she may not have discovered till the next day or several days after/dumped the car.

MY BOLD

I've said it before on other threads, but it bears repeating: No long-term resident of Florida, which KC was, could ever believe that leaving any living creature inside a car or trunk of car, in the heat of summer, for anything but the fewest of minutes (certainly under 10), would result in anything but death or catastrophic brain damage.
 
Well folks, I do believe with 260 posts so far, they might be an indication of what the jurors will be debating in the jury room.

I am with one lost girls and her opinions. I await both sides to present their evidence and and theories and will respect the jury's decisions.
 
The title of this thread is kind of provocative. She's innocent until proven guilty, but at the end of this trial she is going to be found "guilty" or "not guilty," not "innocent."

In addition, though I am not a lawyer and I'm sure this is not a legal definition, "innocent" denotes a concept in my mind that just cannot be attributed to Casey's actions. To me it would mean she had nothing to do with it at all, and that just can't be true. That is why IMO the title of this thread has a certain shock value.
 
I'm going to play devil's advocate, although I shouldn't. But some might say that the child of a parent who doesn't care, can die accidentally or due to neglect and that the parent of such a child would not show normal, human emotion or motherly instinct at such a time because they don't possess it.

However, that scenario does not explain why such a parent would risk the death penalty rather than admit to an accident or neglect.



I am confused. Maybe I missed something but what anonymous phone call are you referring to? Thank you!!!!!!!



I believe that the family was and remains very dysfunctional. I believe that casey received horrible dichotomous messages from her mother, mostly and that her father was an ineffectual, generally passive parent, who sometimes tried to intervene but was shouted down by stronger personalities in the house.

I think casey was told, growing up, that she was a princess and perfect, could do no wrong and that anyone who dared criticize her was stupid, ignorant and lying. However, that message was reserved for anything that possibly related to acts on casey's part that "outsiders" could see, or when the family image was threatened by casey's behavior or outsider opinions. At such times, Cindy reared up in a protective mode and in fierce, illogical denial, goes my theory.

But the other message I surmise casey received was one from her pathologically enmeshed mother who saw casey as she secretly saw herself, and who desired to punish casey in order to destroy that which she hated about herself and which she secretly felt she was. That message was that casey was a very bad little girl, who always made mistakes, who was lazy, a liar, and later, a bad mother and who needed to be totally controlled by her own devoted mother to avoid catastrophe.

I believe this because I have watched them very closely and have experience with families that are similar, unfortunately. Anyhow the result of being raised with such dichotomous messages? I believe the result is a person who is initially vain and narcissistic, while at the same time self-loathing and terrified of her mother, of disappointing said mother and being shamed.

But it does not end there. Because people grow and learn from their experience and from casey's experiences she learned first how to lie and then that she had to lie and after that, that if she lied about something that her mother felt could shame the family name, the lies would be believed and supported. So casey became free, in a sense, of her mother's control. She grew to realize that she could do anything and if it could possibly be a source of embarrassment to Cindy, Cindy would help her to cover it up and would back off if casey's tantrums threatened to reveal the truth about the family.

And as casey grew older and realized that she had this type of control over her mother, the rage she had long suppressed from fear or a sense of powerless, at the angry, controlling parent who had unfairly "punished" her all her life and who she felt continued to do so in sick, little psychological ways, like taking over her baby, being the first to hold the child, even before casey, replacing the princess casey with the princess Caylee and further ruining casey's life by using the child as an instrument to make "unfair" demands on casey, like that she had to get a job or care for her own kid, and using the "greatest mistake" of casey's life to continue to try to shackle and control her, well, that rage transformed her narcissism and lying into something much more pathological and a sociopathic monster was born.

Is this sociopathic monster the quivering child full of confusion and fear of her wrathful mother that casey likely used to be at one time? Just listen to her calls from jail to home. Listen and watch the jail visits. Listen to witness testimony about how she talked about and treated her parents. Listen to witness testimony about how she reacted to them and how they deferred to her, not even daring to bring Caylee's name up when she was released from jail. I think once you do that you will see that the quivering child was replaced by a diabolical human being who learned how to manipulate the sick family she came from and who turned the tables, changing from the one who was afraid to the one who caused the fear in that household. :twocents:





I don't think she suddenly "snapped" and decided to chloroform her daughter. I think she planned it for some time and when certain things came to a head, decided, possibly somewhat rashly at that moment, that she had had enough, that time had finally come and that killing Caylee was the answer to all her problems. One doesn't research, make and use chloroform when they "snap".

Also, again, if it was an accident, why didn't casey ever admit to such, while in jail for almost three years and charged for first degree murder and facing the death penalty? That makes no sense to me. The investigators practically begged casey to admit to an accident. Her attorneys well knew that if they called the state and had one of those conversations that attorneys do, stating "Listen, let's say this was an accident. Let's say we are going to put casey on the stand to state just that. I think we can get a jury to believe that. What do you have to offer us?", they would have gotten a reception, is my bet. IMO, that conversation never happened. Why? Because it wasn't an accident.

:clap::clap::clap:
 
I'm going to play devil's advocate, although I shouldn't. But some might say that the child of a parent who doesn't care, can die accidentally or due to neglect and that the parent of such a child would not show normal, human emotion or motherly instinct at such a time because they don't possess it.

However, that scenario does not explain why such a parent would risk the death penalty rather than admit to an accident or neglect.



I am confused. Maybe I missed something but what anonymous phone call are you referring to? Thank you!!!!!!!



I believe that the family was and remains very dysfunctional. I believe that casey received horrible dichotomous messages from her mother, mostly and that her father was an ineffectual, generally passive parent, who sometimes tried to intervene but was shouted down by stronger personalities in the house.

I think casey was told, growing up, that she was a princess and perfect, could do no wrong and that anyone who dared criticize her was stupid, ignorant and lying. However, that message was reserved for anything that possibly related to acts on casey's part that "outsiders" could see, or when the family image was threatened by casey's behavior or outsider opinions. At such times, Cindy reared up in a protective mode and in fierce, illogical denial, goes my theory.

But the other message I surmise casey received was one from her pathologically enmeshed mother who saw casey as she secretly saw herself, and who desired to punish casey in order to destroy that which she hated about herself and which she secretly felt she was. That message was that casey was a very bad little girl, who always made mistakes, who was lazy, a liar, and later, a bad mother and who needed to be totally controlled by her own devoted mother to avoid catastrophe.

I believe this because I have watched them very closely and have experience with families that are similar, unfortunately. Anyhow the result of being raised with such dichotomous messages? I believe the result is a person who is initially vain and narcissistic, while at the same time self-loathing and terrified of her mother, of disappointing said mother and being shamed.

But it does not end there. Because people grow and learn from their experience and from casey's experiences she learned first how to lie and then that she had to lie and after that, that if she lied about something that her mother felt could shame the family name, the lies would be believed and supported. So casey became free, in a sense, of her mother's control. She grew to realize that she could do anything and if it could possibly be a source of embarrassment to Cindy, Cindy would help her to cover it up and would back off if casey's tantrums threatened to reveal the truth about the family.

And as casey grew older and realized that she had this type of control over her mother, the rage she had long suppressed from fear or a sense of powerless, at the angry, controlling parent who had unfairly "punished" her all her life and who she felt continued to do so in sick, little psychological ways, like taking over her baby, being the first to hold the child, even before casey, replacing the princess casey with the princess Caylee and further ruining casey's life by using the child as an instrument to make "unfair" demands on casey, like that she had to get a job or care for her own kid, and using the "greatest mistake" of casey's life to continue to try to shackle and control her, well, that rage transformed her narcissism and lying into something much more pathological and a sociopathic monster was born.

Is this sociopathic monster the quivering child full of confusion and fear of her wrathful mother that casey likely used to be at one time? Just listen to her calls from jail to home. Listen and watch the jail visits. Listen to witness testimony about how she talked about and treated her parents. Listen to witness testimony about how she reacted to them and how they deferred to her, not even daring to bring Caylee's name up when she was released from jail. I think once you do that you will see that the quivering child was replaced by a diabolical human being who learned how to manipulate the sick family she came from and who turned the tables, changing from the one who was afraid to the one who caused the fear in that household. :twocents:





I don't think she suddenly "snapped" and decided to chloroform her daughter. I think she planned it for some time and when certain things came to a head, decided, possibly somewhat rashly at that moment, that she had had enough, that time had finally come and that killing Caylee was the answer to all her problems. One doesn't research, make and use chloroform when they "snap".

Also, again, if it was an accident, why didn't casey ever admit to such, while in jail for almost three years and charged for first degree murder and facing the death penalty? That makes no sense to me. The investigators practically begged casey to admit to an accident. Her attorneys well knew that if they called the state and had one of those conversations that attorneys do, stating "Listen, let's say this was an accident. Let's say we are going to put casey on the stand to state just that. I think we can get a jury to believe that. What do you have to offer us?", they would have gotten a reception, is my bet. IMO, that conversation never happened. Why? Because it wasn't an accident.

gitana RespectfullyQuoted :tyou:

I am only responding to the part in bold. (Although the rest of the post has great insight. )

George Anthony
Statement to LE
July 24, 2008


[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3887274&postcount=11"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Interview Reference Guide To Finding All Interviews, Motions, Grand Jury and Trials.[/ame]


GA: All I can do is ask if, if you feel that this is going in the direction that my, my heart is killing me right now to say it even if its going into my granddaughter is not, no longer alive. I'm going to handle it the best I can, but I need to be there for my wife and my, my son. We, we need to, just because its only us three left the way I'm looking at it right now. Because if there's, if we lost my granddaughter I've lost my daughter. And that's, you know how hard that's gonna be?
(skip)
LE: You haven't lost your daughter regardless of what took place, alright?
(skip)
LE: A horrible accident...
GA: Right
LE: A number of things could happen, okay?
GA: (sighs)
(skip)
LE: Let me tell you something, okay? And I tried to tell your wife this. I tried to tell you if you did go down this road it is going to, it is going to turn into a circus, okay?
GA: Yes
LE: If you noticed, neither of us have been on any talk shows and stuff. Our job is to go out here and find your granddaughter and find out what happened. And...
(skip)
LE: ...say anything about what happened, neither of us want to do that, okay? Now, in Florida we have a very uhm...
LE: liberal...
LE: ...liberal public records law, okay? We have to release certain things, okay?
GA: I understand.
LE: And all the things we can hold back, we hold back. I mean if you noticed a lot of the, a lot of the stuff that came out on well uh, evidence came out with him on the witness stand. We didn't run out in front of the TV cameras and say the car smelled like uh, you know like there's a, a dead body in it. We have never run out and said that stuff. It happened in court.
LE: (other) And, as a matter of fact I think uh, I can't remember if it was you or if it was Lee that I was talking to you about this its, its actually I think I was talking to all three of you that night. Maybe it was you two when, when your wife went into the other room is that there are things we have to keep close.
LE: Right
LE: Obviously because we're you know, we're investigating what happened. that's ultimately what we're doing is investigating what happened.
(paraphrase: LE goes on to explain that he feels for what George must be going through and how they do not want to shock George but when on the stand they must answer questions they are being directly asked. )
(skip)
LE: One of the things that in my opinion is, kind of hurting and uh, hurting our investigation somewhat and I'm thinking maybe hurting your family is Cindy going on the news and, and saying things that she knows not to be true.
GA: Yes
LE: Such as...
GA: We have discussed that...
LE: ...her courtroom test...or when she comes out of the court room and she starts making comments that we're not doing our job and all that. Again, I understand emotion is there but what's hurting, what might hurt your family is that obviously those things are not true.
(end snip)

The trial starts on Tuesday. Jose says after his opening statement we will all say "ah." :waiting:

:websleuther:
 
I don't want to derail this thread but one thing that bothers me is that when we have children die from neglect in FL, we rarely see a parent or caregiver charged with murder and they definitely don't face LWOP. For example, children left in a hot car by a parent, children who wander out to the pool, etc. It may be what the law says but I haven't seen very many cases where the parent is charged with 1st degree murder. I am interested to see how the SA proves that the charges are correct in this case.

In the cases that you are talking about -drownings, hot cars- did the parents call 911 for help ? Or did they duct tape the dead child's faces, triple wrap them in garbage bags and dump them? Did they cry and breakdown while the EMTs tried to revive their dead babies or did they go out dancing?

The state should not have to prove it was NOT an accident. If a woman of a dead child will not ADMIT it was an accident and instead she chooses to sit in jail for 3 years and claim a non-existent babysitter stole her kid then it is her problem.

I think that Casey has proven to us all it was not an accident. When she was first arrested she was given ample opportunity to cop an accident plea. he denied it and up until now has continued to deny it. Now that her murder trial is here she MAY try and claim it was an accident. Her problem now is that she worked so hard to try and show it wasn't an accident that now she is stuck with it.

Do you think that IF it was a simple accident, that she should get the same penalty as a mom who called 911 when her child drowned?
 
For a long, long time, I thought Caylee had drowned in the pool. The one thing that kept ruining my theory, however, was the duct tape. I just can't see how the duct tape would fit into a drowning scenario.

It only works for me as a staging item to help support her kidnapping story.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
54
Guests online
1,700
Total visitors
1,754

Forum statistics

Threads
605,548
Messages
18,188,554
Members
233,431
Latest member
Crunchy Riff
Back
Top