Is Casey Anthony Possibly Innocent?

[Wisteria]

IMO this story would have played out completely differently if caylee was found sooner. The case in Maine this week is an example. KC would have not had the help of time to cover her tracks. This case would have been closed a long time ago. 31 days. Then 6 months in the swamp. Time does not heal but it definitely helped this accused.

 

[cityslick]

Just want to say thanks for this thread. As someone who hasn't followed this case very closely it's refreshing to hear all sides of arguments. It may be a unpopular topic but it at least gives perspective on different viewpoints.

 

[believe09]

From the FL 2010 Statutes:

"(2) The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual, is murder in the second degree and constitutes a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life or as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(3) When a person is killed in the perpetration of, or in the attempt to perpetrate, any: (a) Trafficking offense prohibited by s. 893.135(1),
(b) Arson,
(c) Sexual battery,
(d) Robbery,
(e) Burglary,
(f) Kidnapping,
(g) Escape,
(h) Aggravated child abuse,
(i) Aggravated abuse of an elderly person or disabled adult,
(j) Aircraft piracy,
(k) Unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb,
(l) Carjacking,
(m) Home-invasion robbery,
(n) Aggravated stalking,
(o) Murder of another human being,
(p) Resisting an officer with violence to his or her person, or
(q) Felony that is an act of terrorism or is in furtherance of an act of terrorism,
by a person other than the person engaged in the perpetration of or in the attempt to perpetrate such felony, the person perpetrating or attempting to perpetrate such felony is guilty of murder in the second degree, which constitutes a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life"

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...ing=&URL=0700-0799/0782/Sections/0782.04.html

I can see ICA being guilty of second degree murder. I can entertain the idea that she rendered Caylee unconscious without the intention of killing her.

 

[Solace]

From the FL 2010 Statutes:

"(2) The unlawful killing of a human being, when perpetrated by any act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life, although without any premeditated design to effect the death of any particular individual, is murder in the second degree and constitutes a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life or as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.
(3) When a person is killed in the perpetration of, or in the attempt to perpetrate, any: (a) Trafficking offense prohibited by s. 893.135(1),
(b) Arson,
(c) Sexual battery,
(d) Robbery,
(e) Burglary,
(f) Kidnapping,
(g) Escape,
(h) Aggravated child abuse,
(i) Aggravated abuse of an elderly person or disabled adult,
(j) Aircraft piracy,
(k) Unlawful throwing, placing, or discharging of a destructive device or bomb,
(l) Carjacking,
(m) Home-invasion robbery,
(n) Aggravated stalking,
(o) Murder of another human being,
(p) Resisting an officer with violence to his or her person, or
(q) Felony that is an act of terrorism or is in furtherance of an act of terrorism,
by a person other than the person engaged in the perpetration of or in the attempt to perpetrate such felony, the person perpetrating or attempting to perpetrate such felony is guilty of murder in the second degree, which constitutes a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life"

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes...ing=&URL=0700-0799/0782/Sections/0782.04.html

I can see ICA being guilty of second degree murder. I can entertain the idea that she rendered Caylee unconscious without the intention of killing her.

Anyone know the sentence for second degree?

 

[RatTatTat]

"Innocence" is irrelevant in our legal system. One must prove that they are "not guilty" of the crime they are charged with. It's an important legal disitinction.

 

[gamom]

How will it be proven ICA made the internet searches?

I am sure the state will prove both CA and GA were at work and it was KC based on other websites she went to in the same time frame (myspace) and she logged into her account, etc.

In all honesty, though, they really don't have to prove it. How much of a coincidence that cholorform was searched on the A's computer and tons of just happened to be found in KC's car, and on a joke sent to her from RM. Despite what the defense claims, Cholorform is not a household product.

Again, folks. It's reasonable doubt. To me that means if you have to say "wow, that's a coinicidence" more than once...chances are it's not a coincidence. Lets take a look at what the jurors will receive in regards to reasonable doubt: I hate to keep referencing the law, but this is what the jury will be taking a oath to follow. When they get stuck, this is what they will look to for answers.

Per Florida's Supreme Jury instructions: "A reasonable doubt as to the guilt of the defendant may arise from the evidence, conflict in the
evidence or the lack of evidence.
http://www.flcourts18.org/PDF/criminal.pdf

In my opinion, The cholorform is NOT a conflict. I think we can make a list of over 100 things that are NOT in conflict with the evidence. The fake Nanny, not a conflict. A missing baby then a body, not a conflict. Mom being the last to see her alive, not a conflict, party photos, target vidoes, blockbuster, No caylee, friends hearing her lie to CA on the phone about where Caylee was, all not a conflict in the evidence.

Right now the only conflicts in this case are WHO HAD CAYLEE? and while normally, the defense does not have to prove anything, in this case they have to prove Caylee was safe in someone elses care. They have to produce a non fictional person who will say, yes, I was watching Caylee then explain why KC never said anything for 3 years about it.

No one is going to buy the I was framed and sat in jail for 3 years lying theory. The problem is, when KC started lying, she never expected the body to be found. She wanted to create doubt that Caylee was still alive. Hoping she would go to trial w/ a deceased child never being found and be able to talk about all of these so called Caylee sightings in GA and CA. But once she was found, the plan backfired. End of yet another hallway, KC.

 

[believe09]

Anyone know the sentence for second degree?

A sentence that does not exceed life in prison..I would think it takes the DP off of the table.

 

[believe09]

Comes back to

Motive

Means

Opportunity

Only ICA has all three, and there goes your reasonable doubt.

I am not speaking for the OP-but the terms of the thread included thoughts on lesser charges. Is this a DP case? I can see why SA believes it is-I think the weak point in their prosecution...in my layman's opinion, is the premeditation piece. JMO.

 

[katydid23]

Thanks for starting this thread Paximus.

I have followed this case from day 31. I have read the evidence, read the depos, read the statements by all parties that were made to law enforcement. While the evidence as a whole does seem to point to Casey’s guilt, there has always been one point that has niggled in the back of my mind that has made me question it:

George’s statement as to when he had last seen Caylee.

He remembered what he was watching on TV. Remembered exactly what she was wearing. Later embellished his statement to include that he had given her breakfast that morning. I can’t remember what I was wearing last week, let alone a month ago. I can’t remember if I ate breakfast two days ago, and certainly cannot remember if I did on a specific day 31 days ago. Can I reasonably believe that GA remembered these points a month later? No. Therefore I suspect that he may be lying.

But why lie about this? What benefit is there to lying about that specific day? What piece might it add to the puzzle? It does nothing to make Casey look innocent, but in fact reinforces the fact that Calylee left with Casey and that Casey was the last person to have seen Caylee.

Is that it? Are George’s lie and embellishments meant to show that Caylee left with Casey and shift the focus from him to his daughter? I can’t answer that, but as I said, it has niggled in my mind for several years.

The 31 days of happy partying? The baby was safe with her grandfather.
The smell in the trunk? The grandfather had a key.
The duct tape? It belonged to the grandfather.
The lies to LE? She hadn’t had a chance to talk to her dad to find out what the heck was going on so she made something up until she could talk to him alone.
Sitting in jail all of this time? She knows the evidence points to her and she still doesn't know what really happened. Is putting her trust in the justice system to find her innocent.

I really feel that I need to hear the evidence as presented by the state and the rebuttal of that evidence from the defense before deciding guilt or innocence. If the bus is headed towards George, my mind can only think…maybe it should be.

I don't know if my doubt is "reasonable doubt", but these are my thoughts ... for what they're worth.

The problems with the 'George Did IT' scenario are many. Bottom line, he was thoroughly investigated and shown to be innocent.

Besides, why would she make up this big long nanny web of lies, and even try and sell those lies to George? He and Cindy both asked her to put the child on the phone and she said , 'NO, she was with the nanny. ' Why would she say all that IF GEORGE WAS THE PERP?

Casey HERSELF says she left the house with Caylee that day. Why wouldn't she tell the cops that George took and KILLED her child if that is what happened?

And I have no problem with George remembering a lot about what happened on the day Caylee was last seen. I used to put my kids on a plane to go see their grandparents every summer. They would be gone for 3 weeks. I ALWAYS remembered in my mind's eye the details of my last day with them until they flew home. It is natural, imo.

Why wouldn't she

 

[grammieto5]

This is not a debate thread so if you believe she is guilty please post those sentiments in other threads where such discussions take place. This thread is for those who feel she might be innocent OF FIRST DEGREE MURDER, you may feel she is guilty of other lesser included charges OR innocent of everything. This is a place to come and chat with others who may share that same sentiment.

Tell us why you think she is innocent of first degree murder or any murder at all and what you think really happened to Caylee.

All theories relating to Casey Anthony's possible innocence of first degree murder are welcomed and encouraged here, those who disagree wrt her innocence should not post here to try and rebut the theories wrt to her possible innocence.

Once the thread gets going a bit I will offer some of my own views wrt to the possibility that maybe she is innocent.

I will start off by saying I indeed think she is innocent of first degree murder simply because I havent seen any evidence to prove to me beyond a reasonable doubt that she is guilty of premeditated first degree murder.


Please offer your opinions for the sake of open and honest discussion only.

I had these same thoughts a few weeks ago. Where is the 100% proof that KC did this crime. I look forward to reading what your views are.

 

[PAXIMUS]

I think we're on the same page I just wanted you to clarify. Thanks.

I have similar reasons for being a skeptical juror. There are too many cases that seem open and shut at first glance. I the number of people freed from death row is about 140 post-Furman.

Hey thats a great point and one of the main reasons I try to train myself to remain skeptical, especially in a DP case, there is just too much at stake to start jumping to conclusions and letting your gut feelings control you.

That said, would you agree if Casey is set free it would be almost as bad for her as life in prison, everyone knows her now, they know she is a compulsive liar and a thief, she would have a harder time living and enjoying life outside of prison than she would inside. Can you imagine what kind of pariah she would be?


LOTS of good discussion here from all sides and I enjoy it, will scroll back and try and address questions to me that I missed, keep it coming...

 

[gamom]

This is where I stand also, right now she is innocent and can the state prove she is guilty of murder beyond a reasonable doubt? I dont think they can and I have all the evidence that one is able to see without being part of the case itself.

After all the evidence and lack there of that you have seen, would you vote "not quilty"? Assuming the defense does what they have said they will do and not present anything additional then what you already know?

 

[believe09]

Hey thats a great point and one of the main reasons I try to train myself to remain skeptical, especially in a DP case, there is just too much at stake to start jumping to conclusions and letting your gut feelings control you.

That said, would you agree if Casey is set free it would be almost as bad for her as life in prison, everyone knows her now, they know she is a compulsive liar and a thief, she would have a harder time living and enjoying life outside of prison than she would inside. Can you imagine what kind of pariah she would be?

This isnt directed at me, but might I state my opinion? One of the worst things to happen to OJ was the pariah thing. The people who would walk out the door of resturants, the people who would walk out of the audience at Larry King.

In ICA's case, she is still facing her lawsuit regarding Zanny, am I correct in this? If GA comes up in the trial as a blind, she is still facing deposition regarding any potential suit against JB. She has a long way to go before her freedom is assured, imo.

Yes, I think she would be a pariah.

 

[PAXIMUS]

Thanks for starting this thread Paximus.

I have followed this case from day 31. I have read the evidence, read the depos, read the statements by all parties that were made to law enforcement. While the evidence as a whole does seem to point to Casey’s guilt, there has always been one point that has niggled in the back of my mind that has made me question it:

George’s statement as to when he had last seen Caylee.

He remembered what he was watching on TV. Remembered exactly what she was wearing. Later embellished his statement to include that he had given her breakfast that morning. I can’t remember what I was wearing last week, let alone a month ago. I can’t remember if I ate breakfast two days ago, and certainly cannot remember if I did on a specific day 31 days ago. Can I reasonably believe that GA remembered these points a month later? No. Therefore I suspect that he may be lying.

But why lie about this? What benefit is there to lying about that specific day? What piece might it add to the puzzle? It does nothing to make Casey look innocent, but in fact reinforces the fact that Calylee left with Casey and that Casey was the last person to have seen Caylee.

Is that it? Are George’s lie and embellishments meant to show that Caylee left with Casey and shift the focus from him to his daughter? I can’t answer that, but as I said, it has niggled in my mind for several years.

The 31 days of happy partying? The baby was safe with her grandfather.
The smell in the trunk? The grandfather had a key.
The duct tape? It belonged to the grandfather.
The lies to LE? She hadn’t had a chance to talk to her dad to find out what the heck was going on so she made something up until she could talk to him alone.
Sitting in jail all of this time? She knows the evidence points to her and she still doesn't know what really happened. Is putting her trust in the justice system to find her innocent.

I really feel that I need to hear the evidence as presented by the state and the rebuttal of that evidence from the defense before deciding guilt or innocence. If the bus is headed towards George, my mind can only think…maybe it should be.

I don't know if my doubt is "reasonable doubt", but these are my thoughts ... for what they're worth.

Terrific information MM this is the sort of thing I was hoping for, I am going to re read your post a few times and let it sink it before reply, good stuff!

 

[PAXIMUS]

After all the evidence and lack there of that you have seen, would you vote "not quilty"? Assuming the defense does what they have said they will do and not present anything additional then what you already know?

Thats a tough one because I admittedly have not seen everything but I will say this, I would never vote for the DP, I am firmly against and as I said my gut tells me she is involved somehow, I think it would be very tough for to be vote not guilty, I would really need to know lesser charges included would be before I could really answer this but I am not going to lie to you, based STRICTLY on what I know and I would say I probably know as much as most of you who have followed the case, and assuming the state doesnt bend over backwards in their presentation but just lays it out there, based on what I know right now today I would likely vote not guilty simply because I dont think the state can prove it an I am one of those guys that would rather see ten guilty people go free rather than one innocent person lose their freedom, but again if the state does an extraordinary over the top job and I think Ashton in particular is capable and very likable, I could be swayed for a guilty verdict.

 

[gamom]

US refers to ME and any others who would like to join the discussion about the possibility of her being innocent. There is no need for hostility, I am just doing my thing.


As for the thread title its very simple, if you are in the minority here at WS and think Casey is innocent period, or not guilty of first degree murder, this is a thread for you to come share your thoughts about that without being dogpiled and jumped on by those who have made up their minds that she is 100% guilty, its a thread to come and chat about who else may have killed her if you think Casey may be innocent, etc. Simple enough really.

Do you think Casey is possibly innocent? If you answer yes to that question here is a thread for you to come and share your thoughts and theories. I for one would love to hear them and learn from them.

So who do you think did it? And why do you think she lied for 3 years and never tried to find Caylee?

Do you think if the duct tap WAS placed on Caylee's mouth before she died that it is a form of child abuse?

Do you feel that KC not knowing or reporting her child missing for 31 days is a form of felony aggravated child neglect?

Curious to hear your thoughts.

 

[cv1964]

This is a great thread and brings up a lot of things (worries) I've had as we get closer to trial.

Is she "innocent"? Not by a long shot, can she be found "not guilty".. I'm worried it could happen.

I think it's important for all of us to realize that while we have had YEARS to look at and study the evidence to draw our conclusions, the jury won't have that same amount of time. They are going to have a LOT to absorb in a very short amount of time.

Playing devils advocate I can easily see how the DT can raise reasonable doubt about all the evidence and explain away the partying, not reporting etc.

The one thing I can't see being "explained away" though is Zanny.

The other thing we have to remember is "reasonable doubt" and what it means to different people. Remember it doesn't matter what "you" think the law says.. it IS open to interpretation in each persons mind.

One person might say "We have to use our common sense and common sense says all these pieces of evidence point to KC".. another person might think "We have to use our common sense and common sense tells me that no one saw her do it, none of the evidence points directly to her, it could have been a family member and she was afraid to tell her mommy because she didn't want to get in trouble.. I am not allowed to vote guilty in that case)

Because so many people have different interpretations, here is my fear of what could happen:

The last time I was on a jury we had a phone harassment case. The evidence showed the victim had numerous restraining orders against the guy and proof that he had violated those orders. They had a TAPE of him harassing and threatening the victim. He did not admit that it was him on the tape.

During deliberations 11 of us voted for guilty.. ONE person could not vote that way because he had no PROOF that it was the defendant who was on the tape. In his mind that constituted "reasonable doubt"

Goes to show that even the best circumstantial evidence isn't always enough for some people.

 

[katydid23]

[The 31 days of happy partying? The baby was safe with her grandfather.]

During that time she was leaving messages with her parents saying she was out of town for work WITH CAYLEE. Why would she tell her father that if HE actually had the child?

Why would she HERSELF say that she left the house with her child that day? She said that in ALL of her initial statements. Why would she take the blame if he killed her baby? Why sit in jail for 3 years already?

[The smell in the trunk? The grandfather had a key.]

Yes, but she had custody and control of the car during the time the dead body was in the trunk. Are we to believe she was driving around with her dead child and she did not know it? Even though she had lots of other things she put in her trunk at the time and the car reeked. It smelled so bad that she even told people lies to cover it up. Dead squirrels in her engine? There is NO WAY that her father searched around the town, found where Casey was hiding out with her new bf,[ who he did not even know] and then placed his grand daughters dead body in the trunk. Then he would have had to sneak back and retrieve the body and then dump it where Casey used to bury her dead pets.
Why was George framing his daughter after killing his granddaughter? Motive?


[The duct tape? It belonged to the grandfather.]

Again, this would mean that George was framing his daughter for the murder of his 2 yr old granddaughter. And he did so without her catching him and without her telling anyone. As a matter of fact, she lied and protected him. HE KILLS HER BABY, FRAMES HER FOR THE CRIME, AND SO SHE COVERS FOR HIM FOR 3 YEARS?

[The lies to LE? She hadn’t had a chance to talk to her dad to find out what the heck was going on so she made something up until she could talk to him alone.]

She had plenty of time to talk to him alone. They spoke on the phone during that time and she ran into him when she went to steal things from the home. Besides, why would she pretend everything was fine if her child was gone and her car smelled so bad that she had to abandon it? Why send cops on wild goose chases?

[Sitting in jail all of this time? She knows the evidence points to her and she still doesn't know what really happened. Is putting her trust in the justice system to find her innocent.]

The reason the evidence points to her is because she lied and she ignored her child's disappearance. IF her father had done this crime then the evidence would have pointed to HIM. She would have said she left the house on the 16th WITHOUT her child, and left her with George. BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT SHE SAID.

She could have sought help to get her child back from her father. She did not do that. She partied and stole and lied because she was not concerned about where her kid was.

 

[Scamperoo]

Before I post my thoughts I want to find out how many rolls of duct tape were found in the home. Was it just the one and it was partially used or were there more. Thanks.

This will tell you everything you could possibly need to know about the duct tape and where it came from and why it was specific to that home.

http://www.thehinkymeter.com/2011/02/08/will-duct-tape-be-caseys-sticking-point-95-shurity/

 

[PAXIMUS]

So who do you think did it? And why do you think she lied for 3 years and never tried to find Caylee?

Do you think if the duct tap WAS placed on Caylee's mouth before she died that it is a form of child abuse?

Do you feel that KC not knowing or reporting her child missing for 31 days is a form of felony aggravated child neglect?

Curious to hear your thoughts.

I have no idea who did it and I dont want to start throwing people under the bus on here even if I have my suspicions, I have a practice to protect and I dont need any defamation suits. That said, I do think she was knocking the kid out and leaving her in the car (man I HATE to think she would leave her in the trunk) and going out with her boy toys, again I HATE to think she would put duct tape on her during THIS PROCESS to muffle any screaming should the child wake up but I have to admit IT SURE LOOKS THAT WAY and if so then perhaps the child suffocated and died I just dont know if the state can prove it. If she did indeed do this the she should be punished with life in prison.


I do have some suspicions of others perhaps being involved but I dont want to go there on a public forum,not yet at least, I will let the defense start that conversation then maybe I will finish it.