*MERGED THREADS*GUILTY or NOT GUILTY? (Florida jury instructions added)

[PeteyGirl]

I'm really trying very, very hard not to be offended by that statement. I'm not "determined" to find NG, I'm giving my opinion on how I view the evidence presented.

I don't find you "determined" either, instead you come across as very thoughtful and would want you on MY jury if god forbid I ever need one

I think it's more difficult and risky (on an emotional level) to turn over every rock possible, than to just jump in the "GUILTY!!" pool. I admire your willingness to pursue your train of thought in a majority of folks who've concluded ICA is guilty of some kind of murder (I'm one of them).

In spite of my conviction, I defend ICA's right to a top notch defense because I am not 99% sure she's guilty. More like 98 or 97%. That 3% or so includes, in my mind, that what we are seeing is a bizarre and very "evil" cover up of a genuine accident, which on it's own makes me hope ICA will be behind bars and away from the rest of us. Lest she have another "accident" and cause another nationwide mayhem of tragedy and grief.

 

[GeekyGirl]

I don't find you "determined" either, instead you come across as very thoughtful and would want you on MY jury if god forbid I ever need one

I think it's more difficult and risky (on an emotional level) to turn over every rock possible, than to just jump in the "GUILTY!!" pool. I admire your willingness to pursue your train of thought in a majority of folks who've concluded ICA is guilty of some kind of murder (I'm one of them).

In spite of my conviction, I defend ICA's right to a top notch defense because I am not 99% sure she's guilty. More like 98 or 97%. That 3% or so includes, in my mind, that what we are seeing is a bizarre and very "evil" cover up of a genuine accident, which on it's own makes me hope ICA will be behind bars and away from the rest of us. Lest she have another "accident" and cause another nationwide mayhem of tragedy and grief.

Thank you for that. I really don't think she's innocent in any sense of the word, and I too, really hope she ends up behind bars, I just think it's important that any conviction, especially one that might result in the death penalty, be reached by a careful consideration of the evidence presented and not by an emotional response to what is truly a horrific thing.

 

[nomoresorrow]

Did I miss something? The duct tape being COD isn't obvious, or else it would be listed on the autopsy as such. I've never said I would require a video a crime, or anything close to that. Jurors are required to have a moral certainty that the death was caused by a criminal act in order to convict on murder, I only stated that at this point in the trial, if I were a juror, I don't think I could vote that way.

I completely respect your opinion on this and I'm not trying to change your mind (lol), just adding my own thoughts here... what I hear the PT saying is that they can't say with absolute certainty which one actually killed Caylee, the duct tape or the chloroform, but what can be said is that the use of either, and certainly both, was done by Casey with the unmistaken intent to kill Caylee. I don't believe that the jury has to know with absolute certainty which weapon (the duct tape or chloroform) used was actually succussful for Casey to commit her dastardly deed. Either one could/would have been sufficient to cause Caylee's death and that is enough, at least for me, to have moral certainty that Caylee's death was the result of a criminal act. JMO ~

 

[yolorado]

This sounds horrible, but even having to explain a drowning would have screwed up her plans for that evening. As I said, hypothetically I think she would seen her death simply as an inconvenience that had to be handled so she could do what she wanted.

It would certainly fit my ideas about Casey's if she moved on after an "accident" - chose not to call 911 and not to mourn immediately so she could show up for her big date with Tony ... leaving "an inconvenient mess" to deal with later. However, I don't see that it fits her profile to sit in jail for three years when she could have avoided that by coming clean as soon as she was arrested. She almost certainly had great faith in her ability to talk her way out of whatever. Why not go with that right away? Or after a year in jail... or two...or two and three-quarters? Ok, she dumped the body and that would look really bad and kind of make it hard to claim an accident. Pure, spec, she MAY have started crushing on Baez and cast herself in some romantic drama where they would get together after he got her acquitted and dumped his wife and felt the jail time was just what she had to go through to get there. Who knows between Day 31 and OS. I don't think it really occurred to her to blame her family until later, even recently, when she finally realized how deep the doo-doo she was in. With the body bagged and dumped in a swamp, she needed an accident without any culpability for herself...and came up with what we've got now. I hope, hope, hope it doesn't work.

The thing is, the vast and overwhelming majority of people who love their children and don't want them dead, who don't kill them deliberately or abusively, whether the person had a past in which they were sexually molested or not, call 911 when there's an accidental drowning, go to the hospital hoping against hope. Then, if the worst happens, they hold a memorial service and deal with remains with respect and dignity, and they mourn. A fairly significant number of drowning victims can be revived if action is taken. A cop would know that. George would NEVER bag up Caylee and dump her anywhere, let alone blocks from home. MO, KC would.

 

[GeekyGirl]

I completely respect your opinion on this and I'm not trying to change your mind (lol), just adding my own thoughts here... what I hear the PT saying is that they can't say with absolute certainty which one actually killed Caylee, the duct tape or the chloroform, but what can be said is that the use of either, and certainly both, was done by Casey with the unmistaken intent to kill Caylee. I don't believe that the jury has to know with absolute certainty which weapon (the duct tape or chloroform) used was actually succussful for Casey to commit her dastardly deed. Either one could/would have been sufficient to cause Caylee's death and that is enough, at least for me, to have moral certainty that Caylee's death was the result of a criminal act. JMO ~

I would agree that that's the SA argument, and that a juror wouldn't necessarily have to know which of the two caused the death, but only if they could prove BARD that those were the only two methods in which the death could have occurred. IMO, if I were a juror I would be reserving judgement to see if the DT had any sort of plausible explanation, bc again, IMO, there are still some things that just don't quite fit with either method offered up by the state. Again, I know not a popular opinion, and quite frustrating I'm sure. I feel compelled to repeat ( for what seems like the millionth time ) I think that at minimum, they've made a great case for manslaughter, they've done the best with what they have, and I'm not saying that by the end of the trial they won't, IMO, have made a strong case for murder, just that they aren't there yet. *Whew* Maybe I should just make that my sig?

 

[sappysoul]

Not far from where I live a man was convicted of killing his girlfriend although her body was never found. They couldn't prove she was dead, let alone a cause of death. He was convicted on circumstantial evidence which IMO wasn't as strong as what they have presented in this case. People are convicted on much less all the time. We know Caylee is dead and we can be near certain it wasn't natural causes or suicide. How does the evidence point to anything other than being killed by Casey? What points to an accident? I just don't see reasonable doubt at this point in the trial.

 

[crucibelle]

It would certainly fit my ideas about Casey's if she moved on after an "accident" - chose not to call 911 and not to mourn immediately so she could show up for her big date with Tony ... leaving "an inconvenient mess" to deal with later. However, I don't see that it fits her profile to sit in jail for three years when she could have avoided that by coming clean as soon as she was arrested. She almost certainly had great faith in her ability to talk her way out of whatever. Why not go with that right away? Or after a year in jail... or two...or two and three-quarters? Ok, she dumped the body and that would look really bad and kind of make it hard to claim an accident. Pure, spec, she MAY have started crushing on Baez and cast herself in some romantic drama where they would get together after he got her acquitted and dumped his wife and felt the jail time was just what she had to go through to get there. Who knows between Day 31 and OS. I don't think it really occurred to her to blame her family until later, even recently, when she finally realized how deep the doo-doo she was in. With the body bagged and dumped in a swamp, she needed an accident without any culpability for herself...and came up with what we've got now. I hope, hope, hope it doesn't work.

The thing is, the vast and overwhelming majority of people who love their children and don't want them dead, who don't kill them deliberately or abusively, whether the person had a past in which they were sexually molested or not, call 911 when there's an accidental drowning, go to the hospital hoping against hope. Then, if the worst happens, they hold a memorial service and deal with remains with respect and dignity, and they mourn. A fairly significant number of drowning victims can be revived if action is taken. A cop would know that. George would NEVER bag up Caylee and dump her anywhere, let alone blocks from home. MO, KC would.

BBM. Of course George would never do that. But according to the DT, George wanted to implicate ICA. You stated that in your opinion, ICA WOULD dump a body in that manner.... and I'm sure George would realize that, as well. Standard disclaimer: I don't think George dumped the body. I'm simply offering another way to think about the dumping/disposal in light of what the DT has claimed.

 

[Chiquita71]

I voted guilty.

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

Posted: 10:41 am EDT June 24, 2011

WEIGHING THE EVIDENCE

It is up to you to decide what evidence is reliable. You should use your common sense in deciding which is the best evidence, and which evidence should not be relied upon in considering your verdict. You may find some of the evidence not reliable, or less reliable than other evidence.

You should consider how the witnesses acted, as well as what they said. Some things you should consider are:

1. Did the witness seem to have an opportunity to see and know the things about which the witness testified?

2. Did the witness seem to have an accurate memory?

3. Was the witness honest and straightforward in answering the attorneys' questions?

4. Did the witness have some interest in how the case should be decided?

5. Does the witness's testimony agree with the other testimony and other evidence in the case? The instructions covered under paragraphs numbered 6 through 10, inclusive, are not common to all cases. These numbered paragraphs should be included only as required by the evidence.

more at the link:
http://www.wftv.com/news/28345442/detail.html

 

[~n/t~]

Clearly the Anthony's testimony can be ruled out in 2 and 3. LOL

And Dr. Spitz couldn't recall a lot of information. I would say his testimony was unreliable. So another wipe out.

Dr. Boch.....the dog buried the bone. Priceless! Another one out the window.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Dr. Vass and Dr. Haskell: satisfied me on all 5 counts.

Yuri Melich: satisfied me on all 5 counts.

All of the responding officers: satisfied me on all 5 counts.

All the friends and aquaintances of ICA: satisified me on all 5 counts.

Officer Forgey: satisfied me on all 5 counts.

Jennifer Welch: satisfied me on all 5 counts.

Dr. G: satisfied me on all 5 counts, although for me personally, I didn't find her testimony as explosive or "riveting" as others here seemed to.

GA: satisfied me on all counts, except #4, so I view his testimony through that filter. But I still think his testimony was honest and as accurate as it could be given the time that has passed.

CA: didn't satisfy me on any of the 5 counts. I believe she told the truth regarding some things, and flat out lied about others.

LA: didn't satisfy me on #3 or #4 .

Dr. Spitz: didn't satisfy me on #1, #2 or #5. I started to say he also didn't satisfy me on #4 , but I don't believe he cares how this case is decided, so much as he simply wanted his name attached to this case.

Dr. Boden: didn't satisfy me on #1, #2, #3 or #5.

Dr. Huntington: didn't satisfy me on #1, #3 or #5

 

[Mountain_Kat]

I'm not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that ICA is guilty of premeditated murder, nor am I convinced that she intended for Caylee to die. But I do think ICA is guilty of aggravated child abuse, and that Caylee died as a result of that crime. So, if I were a juror, I would find her guilty of all charges brought against her.

Would I sentence her to be put to death? No, I wouldn't...for a number of reasons. My reccomendation would be LWOP.

JMO

ETA: Now, if the DT ever presents some evidence that does cast some doubt as to ICA's guilt, my opinion is subject to change. Thus far...I'm not seeing that happening, though.

 

[JBounds]

She's guilty, but I have a feeling the jury will go by the way of aggravated child abuse or aggravated manslaughter of a child which both penalties bring a 30 year sentence.

I don't know why I feel that way. I just do. That being said, I could be wrong and she gets the maximum. Be she won't be walking other than to the state penitentiary.

 

[rose222]

Just because Casey lies at the drop of a hat does not mean that she would have lied had Caylee's death been an accident. Casey is a Sociopath. Sociopaths have very strong "instincts" to survive/win. She would have admitted to the accident (and sought plenty of attention and pity) rather than sit in jail and have her most fundamental rights taken away.

Guilty of first degree murder.

 

[Aedrys]

Anyone want to change their vote after the wonderful judge Perry explained what premeditation actually is? More than one single act - time to reflect. Aggravated child abuse - Felony murder. Lock her up for life.

She had time between each piece of duct tape she tore to reflect and decide NOT to kill her child. She had time to take each piece off and save Caylee's life. She had time to NOT leave her in the trunk of her car to die. She had time to decide her child was more important that her boyfriend and sex. She did not. So yes, there was more than one single act here, especially if the searches for chloroform are thrown in. First degree premeditated murder, put her to death.

 

[bayouland]

I think so as well. But because an autopsy would be able to prove cause of death, she had to get rid of the body.

Exactly. Which is why she freaked when the body was found IMO.

I feel very certain that it wasn't that Caylee was found but instead it was has enough time passed for all the "evidence" (meaning tissue) to be gone.

 

[CookieF]

You know, I always wonder if the OJ jurors felt that OJ did it, but the glove made for reasonable doubt.

While reading the reasonable doubt thread last night, I actually got physically I'll and had to take a break. I am not going to watch the rest of the DT's case because I get so angry at work, which cannot be good for my massage patients!

I feel in my heart that ICA is guilty. I worry that she may get off. When I see WS-ers saying that they will take manslaughter or other lesser charges, it makes me really nervous. To me, it's common sense. She did it or she didn't. Ok, so yes, her family is um....abnormal. (didn't want to violate TOS). But that doesn't excuse murder.

I just hope that the jurors will really think this through, look past all the smoke/mirrors and lies, and get to as much of the truth as any of them can get.

 

[Nali87]

You know, I always wonder if the OJ jurors felt that OJ did it, but the glove made for reasonable doubt.

While reading the reasonable doubt thread last night, I actually got physically I'll and had to take a break. I am not going to watch the rest of the DT's case because I get so angry at work, which cannot be good for my massage patients!

I feel in my heart that ICA is guilty. I worry that she may get off. When I see WS-ers saying that they will take manslaughter or other lesser charges, it makes me really nervous. To me, it's common sense. She did it or she didn't. Ok, so yes, her family is um....abnormal. (didn't want to violate TOS). But that doesn't excuse murder.

I just hope that the jurors will really think this through, look past all the smoke/mirrors and lies, and get to as much of the truth as any of them can get.

I think the judge will instruct the jury that they might have a little doubt, but that it has to be reasonable. And I hope they'll convict.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

She's guilty, but I have a feeling the jury will go by the way of aggravated child abuse or aggravated manslaughter of a child which both penalties bring a 30 year sentence.

I don't know why I feel that way. I just do. That being said, I could be wrong and she gets the maximum. Be she won't be walking other than to the state penitentiary.

There does not have to be intent to kill under the Florida requirements for First Degree murder. If a child dies during the commission of a crime against him/her (in this case, aggravated child abuse), it falls under first degree murder. And the DP is still an option in this scenario, as is LWOP.

So, simply because I do not believe this was premeditated murder, that does NOT mean that I don't think she's guilty of First Degree Murder. I do. And I think she should get the maximum sentence, barring the DP.

 

[LinasK]

You know, I always wonder if the OJ jurors felt that OJ did it, but the glove made for reasonable doubt.

Without rehashing all the reasons why OJ got off, I'll just say- OJ's lawyers did!