Jurors names to be released on or after 10/25

[goatman]

This website has taught me a lot of things. 1. If I have knowledge of a crime as a witness or heard it second hand---I will never ever speak to the media. 2. I will never openly defend someone if they are accused of a crime (even my own husband) if they are accused of a crime to the media 3. If I ever stumble across a body I will report it but only anonymously, no way will I have my name on any LE report.

4. I used to think of serving on a jury as not only a civil duty but an honor. Not anymore, I will do my very best to get out of jury duty, hate to admit that but I will.

If I were one of these jurors I would have already unlisted my number, deleted all my social networking pages and moved and got a new job. Lordy.

JMHO and being honest.

1. The respect RK has been shown on this site has definitely encouraged me to do the exact opposite.

2. I have met (through the web) many members here that are advocates for JUSTICE. Whether that is punishing the guilty or freeing the innocent. It was through this website that I learned about The Innocence Project http://www.innocenceproject.org/. This is a sleuther website, it isn't a parroting of the media, many members spend countless hours looking at EVERY available aspect of a case. Many of us think Casey is guilty because we know EVERY available aspect of the case, including what the jury was not able to see/hear. NOT because the media accused her.

3. Reporting anything takes courage because it means you can be subpeona'd, BUT I stand behind the individuals that post on this site and the site itself that EVERYONE (including murderess') are respected; have you noticed the amount of <modsnip>'s?

4. I think it is the fact that most of the people on this board see being on a jury as a civic duty and an honor that believing that this jury DOES NOT is a difficult pill to swallow, with quotes from jury members like "we just wanted to get out of there...".

IMO, I respect yours, but also disagree.

 

[Pattymarie]

I think that the Judge in this case had the most influence on the jury. He bent over backwards to cater to them. They picked up on this and their "specialness" and acted accordingly. It was all about them. ( I may be in the minority here, but I never understood everyone's love fest with this Judge....who continually capitulated to the defense).

It was never about the baby. NO ONE (even the prosecution, imo) made this case about MURDERED baby Caylee. They didn't even display her picture (Dr. G did) or play the heart-wrenching video of her singing "You Are My Sunshine" WHY?!?!

I still cannot believe this outcome. Jury...geez....But I am very anxious to see what happens to the <modsnip> in the "general population" of free America.

 

[dog.gone.cute]

My Opinion Only ...

The Pineallas 12 + 5 Alternates may be able to "hide" from the media and the public for a while ... until Oct 25 ...

But they will NEVER be able to "hide" from their "conscience" because they KNOW what they did as a JURY was WRONG ! And that is WHY 14 out of the 17 are HIDING, keeping SILENT, and do NOT wish to be KNOWN ! And they should be ASHAMED of themselves !

I hope that there will be constant "reminders" that they let a "murderer" loose ... My Opinion Only ...

I hope that the next time CFCA commits a crime -- MY OPINION is she probably will ... that the Jury remembers "they" let her loose ...

I hope that there will be constant "reminders" that there will never be Justice for Caylee because of "their" "decision" ...

:maddening:

MOO MOO MOO ...

 

[cuppy199]

I personally dont care who the jurors are and I dont care if any of them talk again. But I do think it is wrong to make special rulings on when their names are released. Im sure there have been plenty of juror in Florida on worse cases then this and just because they aren't high profile doesnt make it any less dangerous. The law is the law if some dont like it then fight to change it.

 

[Kat]

1. The respect RK has been shown on this site has definitely encouraged me to do the exact opposite.

2. I have met (through the web) many members here that are advocates for JUSTICE. Whether that is punishing the guilty or freeing the innocent. It was through this website that I learned about The Innocence Project http://www.innocenceproject.org/. This is a sleuther website, it isn't a parroting of the media, many members spend countless hours looking at EVERY available aspect of a case. Many of us think Casey is guilty because we know EVERY available aspect of the case, including what the jury was not able to see/hear. NOT because the media accused her.

3. Reporting anything takes courage because it means you can be subpeona'd, BUT I stand behind the individuals that post on this site and the site itself that EVERYONE (including murderess') are respected; have you noticed the amount of <modsnip>'s?

4. I think it is the fact that most of the people on this board see being on a jury as a civic duty and an honor that believing that this jury DOES NOT is a difficult pill to swallow, with quotes from jury members like "we just wanted to get out of there...".

IMO, I respect yours, but also disagree.

With all due respect (and I'm not saying that sarcastically because I am never sarcastic in posts) I think you may have mistook the meaning behind my post you quoted Goatman.

It was not directed at any member here. I do not make sweeping generalizations about other's thoughts or members here. Ever.

I was merely stating what I have taken away from watching the many cases here and how I would react in order to protect my own privacy and my own families privacy.

I should have made that more clear. My apologies. And this isn't sarcastic either but I do consider myself an advocate for the missing. I have posted more than 12,000 times and most of those posts are in the missing but not forgotten forum. I'm glad you are too.

 

[Quiche]

Isn't the deposition for the civil case in October too? All of this is going to flare up again, just in time for Halloween. I think this delays the inevitable, I think I'd want it over with if I were one of them. jmo

 

[SAgal]

obviously HHJP didn't think it was just "defense talking points"

Did Judge Perry give a statement that he was withholding the names of the Jurors until October to protect the safety of the Jurors because he felt the Jurors had been threatened in some way?
Is there a source with such a statement by Judge Perry?

 

[askfornina]

Did Judge Perry give a statement that he was withholding the names of the Jurors until October to protect the safety of the Jurors because he felt the Jurors had been threatened in some way?
Is there a source with such a statement by Judge Perry?

not certain of what the reasoning was today, but during the initial hearing here is a quote:

"It is no big secret that some people disagree with their verdict," Judge Belvin Perry Jr. said Thursday of the 12-member panel from Pinellas County that cleared Casey Anthony of the more serious charges she faced, including first-degree murder, earlier this week.

"Do you realize there are people out there who want to do crazy things?" he asked. "Some people would like to take something out on them. I'm concerned about the individual who may want to fillet someone and what he might do."

http://www2.tbo.com/news/news/2011/jul/08/MENEWSO1-judge-mulls-release-of-juror-names-ar-242582/

 

[MrsThreadgoode]

(my voice heavy with sarcasm) ... Maybe the juror who was holding out for a five-figure paid interview should list and sell his/her interview on eBay ... the KC mask is currently $25,100. with 83 bids ... still 22 hours left to go.

[ame="http://cgi.ebay.com/CASEY-ANTHONY-LATEX-RUBBER-MASK-EXT-RARE-/260823841484?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3cba4ffacc&clk_rvr_id=250589340024#ht_500wt_1413"]CASEY ANTHONY LATEX RUBBER MASK EXT. RARE | eBay[/ame]

 

[ShebaPoe]

Well that's a very odd statement (BBM). They don't want each other talking to the media? Why? Something to hide?

Well, we now know they must have discussed the media during deliberations, as what other time could they have done that? They should have been discussing the evidence and deliberating - not what they were going to say to the media.

:banghead::banghead::banghead:

MOO

Mel

I think the Judge is being pragmatic.

As for the "speak as a group" angle, I find it hard to believe that there is something truly fishy going on. (Interestingly, I was at the rosen shingle creek the same time the jurors were, for a biz function - just a tangent there. it's a nice place. In theory, anyone could have come in and sniffed them out. In practice, seems implausible).

I can't call this one -

I tend to go with the simplest explanation (sadly, the jury didn't), and the simplest explanation is that the jury was expecting neither the intensity nor the duration of the public's response to this verdict. So now they need to hide behind each other, so to speak.

I do not believe that there were conversations in the jury room about the income prospects of the jury post verdict. But, god only knows. And you're right...their comments are unusual and kind of unprecedented (?) for a high profile verdict.

 

[charok]

I think that the Judge in this case had the most influence on the jury. He bent over backwards to cater to them. They picked up on this and their "specialness" and acted accordingly. It was all about them. ( I may be in the minority here, but I never understood everyone's love fest with this Judge....who continually capitulated to the defense).

It was never about the baby. NO ONE (even the prosecution, imo) made this case about MURDERED baby Caylee. They didn't even display her picture (Dr. G did) or play the heart-wrenching video of her singing "You Are My Sunshine" WHY?!?!

I still cannot believe this outcome. Jury...geez....But I am very anxious to see what happens to the <modsnip> in the "general population" of free America.

pattymarie, i agree w/ you...the judge seem to bend over backwards for the defense..( picking out the jury, striking the ones esp favoring the death penalty...i may be legal dumb, but since when the defense and the accused, especially the accused perp can have a say on who is and who isnt on the jury???? imo, it seemed like the defense and company got WAAAAAAAAAY more "special treatment" and consideration than what ive seen...scott peterson didnt get to pick the jurors did he?
playing devils advocate, im sure he wanted to pander to the defense,b/c IF she was found guilty you KNOW jb/team would be filing mistrial, ect faster than we could say "hooray"...just moo

 

[plastics]

I couldn't care less what their names are. I just know judging by what they have said in interviews, they are dolts. I don't care who, or what their names are. I won't be listening in to anything of theirs anyway. The only thing I want to see in the future is CA behind bars for something or other. So her crazy *advertiser censored* is off the streets, and she can't lie and manipulate anymore people.

 

[askfornina]

pattymarie, i agree w/ you...the judge seem to bend over backwards for the defense..( picking out the jury, striking the ones esp favoring the death penalty...i may be legal dumb, but since when the defense and the accused, especially the accused perp can have a say on who is and who isnt on the jury???? imo, it seemed like the defense and company got WAAAAAAAAAY more "special treatment" and consideration than what ive seen...scott peterson didnt get to pick the jurors did he?
playing devils advocate, im sure he wanted to pander to the defense,b/c IF she was found guilty you KNOW jb/team would be filing mistrial, ect faster than we could say "hooray"...just moo

that is standard legal practice. more info here:

http://subboard.com/legal/resources/packets/pdf/07jury_duty_selection.pdf

 

[Amster]

Whatever....HHJP. :innocent:

 

[RR0004]

A wise decision. Hopefully the media will have moved on and not whipping the public into a frenzy again.

The media whipped the public into a frenzy? About what?

 

[Horace Finklestein]

obviously HHJP didn't think it was just "defense talking points"

Have you heard of the "appeal to authority" logical fallacy?

An Appeal to Authority is a fallacy with the following form:

Person A is an authority on subject S.
Person A makes claim C about subject S.
Therefore, C is true.

 

[Sammiejam]

I'm not sure I understand this post. If one of the jurors had been attacked, it would be ok to not release their names? Some of the jurors have received death threats which, IMO, warrants not releasing their names until after a cool down period. I'm glad that HHJP is doing this.

I really don't understand why some people want to know their names. What benefit could that possibly serve?

Transparency is of EXTREME importance in the jury system. Jury tampering would be a piece of cake to any sleazy shyster lawyer *coughJBcough* who had a mind to win a case(y) the unethical way.

I say release the names and lets see what shakes out.

 

[Melanie]

(my voice heavy with sarcasm) ... Maybe the juror who was holding out for a five-figure paid interview should list and sell his/her interview on eBay ... the KC mask is currently $25,100. with 83 bids ... still 22 hours left to go.

CASEY ANTHONY LATEX RUBBER MASK EXT. RARE | eBay

What The H....GET OUT OF TOWN.

$2,125 -- but I can tell by the user names that someone is driving up the bid (prolly the owner or friends). 81 bids made by 4-5 people. mmmmkkkaaayyy.

Sick I tell ya - sick.

MOO

Mel

 

[Melanie]

The media whipped the public into a frenzy? About what?

Isn't Nancy Grace doing this now? I turned on her show tonight thinking she might just focus on the missing mother of triplets...but...noooooooo...she (or her sub for the night) is still harping about CFCMA. I don't get it. What's the purpose?

Maybe I'll check back in Mid-August and see if she's over it already.

GAHHHHH.

MOO

Mel

 

[21merc7]

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog...ot-so-obvious-lessons-the-casey-anthony-trial

This is an interesting article, includes some thoughts on the jury, and there is a second page that I suggest not skipping.

Just one little blurb:

"It is said that in the Casey Anthony case we should not blame the jurors. I agree - we shouldn't. That is like buying lemmings as pets and then being surprised when they act lemming like. Those jurors were preferred by the defense team for a reason and they performed as expected."