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

[Pattymarie]

Still can't shake the feeling the defense has another surprise in store, like KC admitting she lied about everything EXCEPT the accidental drowning. If she were to admit that she and she alone was responsible for Caylee accidentally drowning, it would turn this case upside down.

The defense's "surprise?"...more lies????

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

makes sense...

 

[SCWldneart]

Not saying I believe it was an accidental drowning....just that if they played it this way it's something the jury could buy into.

 

[CementPond]

My vote/version of what I think happened probably isn't a popular one. I kind of see things a little differently. I do think she's guilty.

However, I do think she loved Caylee based on what we've heard from others, how we saw the way she acted with her in videos, how they both seemed to be happy in pictures, how she (Casey) had lots of Caylee related things all over her walls and room, etc.

Having said that, I think Caylee's death was an accident. HOW, I don't know. I just don't think she plotted and planned to kill her out of maliciousness or something sinister. I think an accident occurred and she panicked and tried to hide the body.

Of course her behavior after the fact is still a little strange and doesn't add up to what I think. Meaning, even if it were an accident and she felt bad, you'd think that she'd at least still feel bad, guilty, appear sad, depressed, SOMETHING along those lines. And yet we know that she seemed happy, normal, etc. So, that I don't get.

But, if I were on the jury I guess I'd have to find her Guilty of First Degree Murder based on how I see things. JMO

 

[GeekyGirl]

My vote/version of what I think happened probably isn't a popular one. I kind of see things a little differently. I do think she's guilty.

However, I do think she loved Caylee based on what we've heard from others, how we saw the way she acted with her in videos, how they both seemed to be happy in pictures, how she (Casey) had lots of Caylee related things all over her walls and room, etc.

Having said that, I think Caylee's death was an accident. HOW, I don't know. I just don't think she plotted and planned to kill her out of maliciousness or something sinister. I think an accident occurred and she panicked and tried to hide the body.

Of course her behavior after the fact is still a little strange and doesn't add up to what I think. Meaning, even if it were an accident and she felt bad, you'd think that she'd at least still feel bad, guilty, appear sad, depressed, SOMETHING along those lines. And yet we know that she seemed happy, normal, etc. So, that I don't get.

But, if I were on the jury I guess I'd have to find her Guilty of First Degree Murder based on how I see things. JMO

How could you find her guilty of first degree if you believe the death was an accident? Serious question, not snark, promise.

 

[CementPond]

Based on what was outlined on page one/first post (below). I think 1 and 3 apply. She was the person who actually killed the victim. But accidentally. Whether giving her something to knock (make her sleep) her out for a while and it was too much, left her in a hot car, whatever. It could be anything. Does that not qualify? While I do have an interest in this stuff, I gotta says that I'm not good with knowing the ins and outs of the different degrees of murder. So, forgive me. JMO

Edited to add: Please let me know if I am picking wrongly. Is there a lesser charge or something I should apply based on what I believe? Like I said, while I do follow things I'm not that too knowledgeable to specifics like that....lol.


1. (Victim) is dead.

Give 2a, 2b, or 2c as applicable.
2.
a. [The death occurred as a consequence of and while (defendant) was engaged in the commission of (crime alleged).]

b. [The death occurred as a consequence of and while (defendant) was attempting to commit (crime alleged).]

c. [The death occurred as a consequence of and while (defendant), or an accomplice, was escaping from the immediate scene of (crime alleged).]

Give 3a if defendant actual perpetrator.
3. a. (Defendant) was the person who actually killed (victim).

How could you find her guilty of first degree if you believe the death was an accident? Serious question, not snark, promise.

 

[Chili Fries]

If I were on the jury I think I'd have a hard time at this point convicting her of either of the first degree murder charges. I don't believe the state has proven premeditation and I think there is still a gap with respect to the child abuse. It's obvious that the defense has been disjointed and somewhat incoherent but the proof lies in the prosecution's case. Maybe after all of the testimony and closing arguments I would be able to vote for first degree felony murder but it's a decision I would definitely struggle mightily with. I won't be surprised if jury deliberations last a while.

 

[kathyn2]

no problem voting guilty here! Guilty!!

 

[GeekyGirl]

Based on what was outlined on page one/first post (below). I think 1 and 3 apply. She was the person who actually killed the victim. But accidentally. Whether giving her something to knock (make her sleep) her out for a while and it was too much, left her in a hot car, whatever. It could be anything. Does that not qualify? While I do have an interest in this stuff, I gotta says that I'm not good with knowing the ins and outs of the different degrees of murder. So, forgive me. JMO


1. (Victim) is dead.

Give 2a, 2b, or 2c as applicable.
2.
a. [The death occurred as a consequence of and while (defendant) was engaged in the commission of (crime alleged).]

b. [The death occurred as a consequence of and while (defendant) was attempting to commit (crime alleged).]

c. [The death occurred as a consequence of and while (defendant), or an accomplice, was escaping from the immediate scene of (crime alleged).]

Give 3a if defendant actual perpetrator.
3. a. (Defendant) was the person who actually killed (victim).

All 3 have to apply... If you believe the death was accidental, but due somehow due to Casey's negligence, then manslaughter would be the appropriate charge. Unless you think it was a result of aggravated child abuse, in which case it would be felony murder. Not trying to lecture, it can be a confusing thing.

 

[kathyn2]

Cement pond, that is still a felony murder (killing by accidently over dosing someone). It is still punishable by the death penalty even if she didn't mean for her to die. That is aggravated child abuse which is murder. So the same punishment applies.

Based on what was outlined on page one/first post (below). I think 1 and 3 apply. She was the person who actually killed the victim. But accidentally. Whether giving her something to knock (make her sleep) her out for a while and it was too much, left her in a hot car, whatever. It could be anything. Does that not qualify? While I do have an interest in this stuff, I gotta says that I'm not good with knowing the ins and outs of the different degrees of murder. So, forgive me. JMO


1. (Victim) is dead.

Give 2a, 2b, or 2c as applicable.
2.
a. [The death occurred as a consequence of and while (defendant) was engaged in the commission of (crime alleged).]

b. [The death occurred as a consequence of and while (defendant) was attempting to commit (crime alleged).]

c. [The death occurred as a consequence of and while (defendant), or an accomplice, was escaping from the immediate scene of (crime alleged).]

Give 3a if defendant actual perpetrator.
3. a. (Defendant) was the person who actually killed (victim).

 

[CementPond]

Oh no, trust me, I do NOT see it as you lecturing me at all. Like I said before, I am sorta clueless when it comes to sentencing and stuff like that. Someone needs to outline it all for me like you just did in order for me to "get it" and remember it (at least for the time being...lol). Thanks for that info.

All 3 have to apply... If you believe the death was accidental, but due somehow due to Casey's negligence, then manslaughter would be the appropriate charge. Unless you think it was a result of aggravated child abuse, in which case it would be felony murder. Not trying to lecture, it can be a confusing thing.

 

[CementPond]

Thanks to you too for filling in the clueless one (ME!). LOL

Cement pond, that is still a felony murder (killing by accidently over dosing someone). It is still punishable by the death penalty even if she didn't mean for her to die. That is aggravated child abuse which is murder. So the same punishment applies.

 

[ladybug]

MAYBE guilty on first degree, though the state is going to have to hammer home how short a time premeditation can be and how long it would have taken to duct tape her mouth, etc.

High probability for felony murder, but I think she actually has a decent defense (no credit to her lawyers). A few of the facts support the "it was an accident" theory- the body being moved so many times, the flurry of calls to CA at work, etc. I don't believe we've heard any evidence about the big fight between CA & ICA, have we? I think the details of that fight would have REALLY bolstered the case for premeditation. I wonder why they weren't presented.

 

[gibby207]

Picked guilty. 84 times looking at how to make chloroform prolly did it for jury.

I just hafta say that this is my first case I've really watched THIS INTENSELY from missing to found to trial and I do question my relaxed state of mind while others are freaking out on WS. It makes me wonder if I should freak out. LOL Now... I have watched some forums on WS going to trial, people watching, that I hadn't been a part of (and coulda pulled the mock juror on) and the same thing happened. Everyone was getting antsy as time was going on, polling even, and with polls closer than this!! Damn near 50/50. The verdict was usually 1st degree murder so I'm totally expecting this in this case. However, I am thinking LWOP. BUUUUTTT. Belvin has final say, and he isn't shy about DP, so that may be done!!

I think BS's prediction of 7/5 LWOP is very accurate based on MOOOOOO.

 

[cecybeans]

MAYBE guilty on first degree, though the state is going to have to hammer home how short a time premeditation can be and how long it would have taken to duct tape her mouth, etc.

High probability for felony murder, but I think she actually has a decent defense (no credit to her lawyers). A few of the facts support the "it was an accident" theory- the body being moved so many times, the flurry of calls to CA at work, etc. I don't believe we've heard any evidence about the big fight between CA & ICA, have we? I think the details of that fight would have REALLY bolstered the case for premeditation. I wonder why they weren't presented.

The fight unfortunately is too "hearsay" to be useful. ICA told her brother about it and JG, but CA denies it up and down directly in her interviews or testimony. No reliable witnesses.

 

[wonders]

Please get your stones ready as I'll stand and let you throw them at me...I've been reading that folks would take into consideration Cindy's greif in deciding ICA fate ie LWOP or DP. *In my opinion only* There is still a lot that I think about as far as Cindy's testimony goes. Such as today when she testified that the home duct tape was BLACK. That kind of testimony in my opinion is deceitful and it really bothers me like crazy. So if I were sitting on that jury I would have no problem in selecting the DP. In my opinion ICA will still out live her parents on death row simply because I'm sure that this whole mess has taken decades off of their lives.

Standing to take my stoning

 

[TwiceIrish]

Picked guilty. 84 times looking at how to make chloroform prolly did it for jury.

I just hafta say that this is my first case I've really watched THIS INTENSELY from missing to found to trial and I do question my relaxed state of mind while others are freaking out on WS. It makes me wonder if I should freak out. LOL Now... I have watched some forums on WS going to trial, people watching, that I hadn't been a part of (and coulda pulled the mock juror on) and the same thing happened. Everyone was getting antsy as time was going on, polling even, and with polls closer than this!! Damn near 50/50. The verdict was usually 1st degree murder so I'm totally expecting this in this case. However, I am thinking LWOP. BUUUUTTT. Belvin has final say, and he isn't shy about DP, so that may be done!!

I think BS's prediction of 7/5 LWOP is very accurate based on MOOOOOO.

Also interesting to note is HHJP has witnessed the many faces of ICA which the jury has not been privy to. Should they return a verdict of guilty as charged, which I cannot see how they won't, and recommend LWOP by a slim margin, I can actually see him going above and beyond and throwing the book at her.

 

[Kentjbkent]

My vote/version of what I think happened probably isn't a popular one. I kind of see things a little differently. I do think she's guilty.

However, I do think she loved Caylee based on what we've heard from others, how we saw the way she acted with her in videos, how they both seemed to be happy in pictures, how she (Casey) had lots of Caylee related things all over her walls and room, etc.

Having said that, I think Caylee's death was an accident. HOW, I don't know. I just don't think she plotted and planned to kill her out of maliciousness or something sinister. I think an accident occurred and she panicked and tried to hide the body.

Of course her behavior after the fact is still a little strange and doesn't add up to what I think. Meaning, even if it were an accident and she felt bad, you'd think that she'd at least still feel bad, guilty, appear sad, depressed, SOMETHING along those lines. And yet we know that she seemed happy, normal, etc. So, that I don't get.

But, if I were on the jury I guess I'd have to find her Guilty of First Degree Murder based on how I see things. JMO

Excellent post depicting the difference of a "tainted" juror against an "untainted" juror.

BOLDED portions above depict of what this member "feels" based on ALL she has seen over last three years, including the videos, photos in bedroom, etc...all things that have NOT been entered into evidence in the trial, but things she is considering in her opinion.

UNDERLINED portion depicts her opinion based SOLELY (and only) what has been presented in trial....

(PS...Not to single you out Cement Pond...just thought your thoughts were perfect example...!!!)

 

[Kentjbkent]

Please get your stones ready as I'll stand and let you throw them at me...I've been reading that folks would take into consideration Cindy's greif in deciding ICA fate ie LWOP or DP. *In my opinion only* There is still a lot that I think about as far as Cindy's testimony goes. Such as today when she testified that the home duct tape was BLACK. That kind of testimony in my opinion is deceitful and it really bothers me like crazy. So if I were sitting on that jury I would have no problem in selecting the DP. In my opinion ICA will still out live her parents on death row simply because I'm sure that this whole mess has taken decades off of their lives.

Standing to take my stoning

What I found so interesting was her particular choice of wording...."black, blue and (hesitancy) POSSIBLY grey...." knowing full well that LDB was questioning her about the duct tape found in the home and on posters....

POSSIBLY????

And no stones for you!! :blowkiss:

 

[gibby207]

Also interesting to note is HHJP has witnessed the many faces of ICA which the jury has not been privy to. Should they return a verdict of guilty as charged, which I cannot see how they won't, and recommend LWOP by a slim margin, I can actually see him going above and beyond and throwing the book at her.

Me too!!! More and more... he's been watching her, and I'm thinking he doesn't like her that much. lol So, I'm 50/50 in what will be the ultimate choice, however am certain it will be 1st degree murder. (big ol moo)

And Slainte!

 

[rbrnmw2]

I voted guilty but quite frankly I am a tad bit nervous because the jury has not seen all the evidence that we have seen in the last 3 years, I pray some of it comes to light in rebuttal