Is Casey Anthony Possibly Innocent?

[Jolynna]

IMO, the forensic we have seen shows Caylee was sealed up in the trunk either immediately, and I do mean IMMEDIATELY, after death or even while Caylee was alive. There is no doubt in my mind about this point.

So...do I believe it is possible that Caylee died in a tragic accident and ICA's immediate reaction was to slap 3 layers of duct tape over Caylee's face and then to toss Caylee into the trunk? No.

ICA's attitude while she strolls through Blockbuster arm in arm with Tony seems pretty darn happy for a mother who has just lost her daughter tragically.

I believe the duct tape and Caylee's being immediately pitched into Casey's trunk along with ICA's perkiness the day Caylee died contradict anything but a planned-in-advance death.

 

[Whisperer]

Can those who believe ICA is innocent of killing her child, please present their case in a logical format? Thank You.

 

[BigMomma]

Is ICA innocent? On lying to LE, No, not innocent. On Child Endangerment? No, not innocent. Child Neglect? No, not innocent. On death by accident, no, not innocent. Death by murder? Questionable. she did lie to LE, she did leave her child in the hands of her parents, I think they were/are Zanny, just do not want to admit to that.

 

[Whisperer]

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.

This is an example and this is the opening post of this thread. It would be helpful to state your reasonable doubts.

I think most do not understand the concept of reasonable doubt..and that includes jury members. I think people are thinking if they have ANY doubt, then she must be innocent. This is not accurate. It is not Beyond a Shadow of a Doubt... Our courts do not operate on that premise.

I think OJ's jury also went with "Beyond a Shadow" also...for there was certainly enough evidence to convict him and if people had any doubt, it wasn't a reasonable one.

 

[Scamperoo]

I don't recall that and I'm not sure they could know.

Because it had to be put on tightly to be attached so well that the lower mandible was still in place, if it had been applied later and the tissues were in any way swollen from decomp, the attachment would not have been so close and the jaw would have fallen away. After a few days any attachment would not be possible due to sloughing of the skin. It was put on to kill or at the point of death as the tape was entwined in the hair and wasn't meant to be removed, in fact it would have had to be removed by cutting.

 

[Whisperer]

Is ICA innocent? On lying to LE, No, not innocent. On Child Endangerment? No, not innocent. Child Neglect? No, not innocent. On death by accident, no, not innocent. Death by murder? Questionable. she did lie to LE, she did leave her child in the hands of her parents, I think they were/are Zanny, just do not want to admit to that.

Is it reasonable to assume then that the parents killed Caylee and Casey is sitting in jail for three years and facing the DP because she loves and respects her parents. If so then one may conclude she has the attributes of a Saint. Is that reasonable?

 

[BigMomma]

Can those who believe ICA is innocent of killing her child, please present their case in a logical format? Thank You.

Unless someone was playing some fast shuffle with information, it is questionable. True, she wasn't around the house too much, true she did go there to pick up clothes or whatnots in the late afternoon, but how do we actually know if she just figured her dad took Caylee to her mom's work? How do we know that for fact? What I would love to know and I bet there is no information on it, is if the officer, the one who took the info about the stolen gas cans? I wonder if he saw Caylee when he went to the house? I think this is a very good question. Would sure clear up a lot of gray area for me.

 

[Whisperer]

So does a death by drowning accident which was later staged to be a kidnap murder rise to the level of a DP case?

Again, is it reasonable to assume that she would sit inside a prison for three years and be accused of murder if it was a drowning accident?

 

[Whisperer]

Unless someone was playing some fast shuffle with information, it is questionable. True, she wasn't around the house too much, true she did go there to pick up clothes or whatnots in the late afternoon, but how do we actually know if she just figured her dad took Caylee to her mom's work? How do we know that for fact? What I would love to know and I bet there is no information on it, is if the officer, the one who took the info about the stolen gas cans? I wonder if he saw Caylee when he went to the house? I think this is a very good question. Would sure clear up a lot of gray area for me.

One would assume the LE didn't see her. If he did see her, what would keep him from reporting it?

 

[BigMomma]

Is it reasonable to assume then that the parents killed Caylee and Casey is sitting in jail for three years and facing the DP because she loves and respects her parents. If so then one may conclude she has the attributes of a Saint. Is that reasonable?

Oh no! Not a saint, no, no. I just go back to the original information about what date Caylee was last seen and all 3 said it was June 7, 8, or 9. How did 3 separate individuals that were separated, come up with the very same date ? I do honestly wonder who told who what prior to 911. How do we know if they pawned her, we don't. we don't what kind of lifestyle the inside of their house had or what kind of mind games were gong on and with who. I think at one point somebody in that family thought this was going to be a cake walk because there is no evidence, or wasn't until they found Caylee and then it all looked like some phantom nanny did all of this. Yes, I could see this as a threat to ICA to shut her mouth, she is the CEO, if she told, who would believe her, if she kept her mouth shut, she'd walk and they'd be all over tv gloating about it, I can see that. More of an act of fear of her parents not love or respect for them. FEAR. BUT it fell apart and I just do not think ICA is playing anybody's game anymore. I think it was an accident, wether ICA was there or not is not the point anymore. Yes, I think at one point she did protect her parents, but not now, no more. I think they did lead her to think she'd walk on this and who would know more about it than a former cop. They all have lied through their teeth, they all know what the heck happened. They all should pay for what happened.

 

[panthera]

Again, is it reasonable to assume that she would sit inside a prison for three years and be accused of murder if it was a drowning accident?

And the key word is "accident". No, it is not reasonable that she would now be facing the DP if it were an accident. A "reasonable" act would be to call 911 and try to revive the child, and be torn with grief and remorse for not being able to save the child.

MOO

 

[Harlow]

I can't say I think she's innocent but I'm not sure they'll be able to convince a jury beyond a reasonable doubt that she's guilty either. The fact that they really don't have a concrete cause of death aside from homicide I think is really going to throw a wrench into things as far as the jury goes and we of course don't know what evidence they'll be seeing/hearing either.

Even when I try to be objective and look at this case from a different angle and think "what if " It's really, really hard to believe she COULD be innocent with her history of being a pathological liar. If she is innocent she is her own worst enemy here.

All that said, I'm keeping an open mind. Baez said something to the effect of "everything people think they know about this case is false" so I am looking forward to his "facts" coming out...

 

[costalpilot]

I am interested in hearing the obviousness of it because I sure dont see it, and I dont mean gut feeling or a hunch I mean actual concrete evidence that proves her guilt. Do share.

its there is you are open to it

otoh, if you are not

i suspect there may be a reason

 

[BigMomma]

One would assume the LE didn't see her. If he did see her, what would keep him from reporting it?

Was he ever asked, I wonder. He really would not have any reason to report seeing a small child there, just wonder if he remembered if he did or not. I'm just asking a general question if this would or could be information that slipped through the cracks. I doubt it, but it would be interesting to find out just the same.

 

[kjpaw]

Unless someone was playing some fast shuffle with information, it is questionable. True, she wasn't around the house too much, true she did go there to pick up clothes or whatnots in the late afternoon, but how do we actually know if she just figured her dad took Caylee to her mom's work? How do we know that for fact? What I would love to know and I bet there is no information on it, is if the officer, the one who took the info about the stolen gas cans? I wonder if he saw Caylee when he went to the house? I think this is a very good question. Would sure clear up a lot of gray area for me.

Assuming you are correct about ICA assuming GA took Caylee to CA's work, why didn't ICA create a scene when she couldn't see Caylee the next day? Why didn't she return home from that day forward? More importantly, why did she tell her friends that Caylee was with the nanny, etc...? I don't mean to question you in a mean manner, I'm truly curious about your response.

Also, do you believe that CA is "in on this" and concocted those stories to AH and the police and FBI about where ICA said she was during those 31 days?

 

[Whisperer]

Big Momma, I will tell you my opinion of the wrong date. Cindy remembered it as the 9th and cindy has a very strong hold on the family and appears to be very organized. She told all of them it was the 9th (?) and they all assumed, "If Mom said it, it must be correct" and they all flew with it.

I do not want to disrupt your thread here. Just popped in here. I was curious as to how you guys think. Very good to have different views. Bye for now. :seeya:

 

[GracieLu]

I've thought a lot about what happened since day 31 and I'll admit, at first I thought this was an accident. I had a hard time understanding why a parent would harm their child and thinking it was probably an accident made it easier to accept.

Now, almost 3 years later, I believe I was wrong. Nobody goes from point A (oh my god my child has drowned) to point Z (bag the child up and throw the child in the trunk) that fast. When an accident happens it's human nature to scream out for help (911, neighbors, etc.). My little one fell off a table onto pavers a few years ago. I turned my back for one sec and she was up on the table and then off, boom. My first instinct, without thinking, was to pick her up and run like heck to the neighbor down the street who is a nurse! That's the biggest problem i have with this being an accident! (as well as 31 days, partying, and so on)

IMO she is not "innocent" and this wasn't a rage killing. She planned and killed Caylee to get back at her mother who was probably on the verge of ending the "gravy train" once she learned ICA hacked into Grandma's/Grandpa's checking account.

 

[ecs5298]

I am interested in hearing the obviousness of it because I sure dont see it, and I dont mean gut feeling or a hunch I mean actual concrete evidence that proves her guilt. Do share.

Stole this from another thread and it's not my post but it covers everything you are asking here.

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6517756&postcount=276"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Legal Questions for our VERIFIED Lawyers #3[/ame]

 

[A_News_Junkie]

Well, Judge Perry just gave the world the civics lesson:

As she sits here today, she is innocent UNTIL proven guilty. But..... I have a hunch already!

 

[cv1964]

Don't get me wrong.. I DO believe KC is guilty.. however for this thread I am willing to take a look at the possibility that she could be found not guilty.. I don't WANT that to happen but it could.

You pretty much echoed what I said.. we do not have a timeline for Caylee, but we DO have one for her mom. The defense CAN and I believe WILL try to use that to their advantage.

IMO I don't think it will work because I can only see ONE way for them to "play off" the Zanny aspect.. and I hope and pray it doesn't fly with the jury..

However, I am also keeping in mind that THIS jury will not have the years we have all had to look over and ponder the evidence and see what we so clearly see and believe..

That is a little bit scary.

There IS a timeline in this case. The state will lay it out quite accurately. And with evidence such as cell phone pings, text messages, videos, surveillance cameras, witness testimony, and her own statements.

We can look at June 16th as a very important target in the timeline. She, by her own admission and by her fathers and mothers witness testimony, left the home with Caylee in early afternoon. George said goodbye then he went to work. Caseys cell ping map shows she was still in the area and came back to the empty house after George left for work. There is evidence of her logging onto the home computer at that time for verification. Caylee was probably right there with her, but no witnesses to that fact, although one friend said they thought they heard her talking in the background during a phone call.

Okay, later that afternoon she goes to meet up with her new boyfriend, WIHOUT HER CHILD. In her initial statement to LE she stated that she dropped her off at her nanny's apt. We now know there was no nanny.
SO WHERE WAS THE BABY WHEN CASEY WENT ON HER DATE ON THE EVENING OF THE !6th? According to this timeline, Caylee is never seen or heard on the phone by anyone after early afternoon of the 16th/

THAT IS AN ACCURATE TIMELINE. It is not a wishy washy or nebulous question. Who was watching Caylee when she went on her date ? Her cell pings show she was either at home or very close to home up until she went to her boyfriends. Both her parents were at work and her brother was out of town. She has never answered this question truthfully or successfully.

ETA: OJ was a national hero. A well respected athlete and a wealthy celebrity. Everyone loved and admired him.

Casey, not so much. She is a proven pathological liar, a proven thief, and a convicted felon, who showed ZERO remorse for her dead child. I do not think we can compare her trial to OJ's for that reason. imoo