Premeditation

[Jolynna]

Yes they were. At this time we don't know if Caylee's hands were or were not, but the absence of duct tape binding the hands of a small child does not negate the fact that it WAS present on her face. I would think duct tape binding hands would be a method to fully retrain an adult whereas it would be easier to restrain a child without binding their hands.

I agree.

The motive behind the killing, the relationship of the killer to the victim and even the sex of the killer needs to be taken into account too.

I wouldn't expect a mother getting rid of her burden to kill the same way that a boyfriend who wanted his victim helpless so he could toy around (for feelings of power or whatever) would.

A mother would want to get it over with and out of sight.

 

[ZsaZsa]

Behavior around the time of the crime IS circumstantial evidence.
In KC's case her behavior is SO totally inappropriate to that of a mother whose child has been 'kidnapped', that it should carry a lot of weight.

 

[Wudge]

I believe there is plenty of inculpatory evidence that we have seen to convict KC.
I also believe her behavior will come in as to what she was doing to look for Caylee for the time that nobody but her knew that Caylee was missing.

What's the clear inculpatory evidence of premeditation?

 

[ZsaZsa]

What's the clear inculpatory evidence of premeditation?

How about applying duct tape so that her nostrils and mouth were completely sealed. Her intention was to kill, when she was tearing/cutting that duct tape.

 

[Wudge]

How about applying duct tape so that her nostrils and mouth were completely sealed. Her intention was to kill, when she was tearing/cutting that duct tape.

What evidence establishes the duct tape as the instrument of death?

 

[ZsaZsa]

What evidence establishes the duct tape as the instrument of death?

What other result would applying duct tape to a nose and mouth have?

 

[Wudge]

What other result would applying duct tape to a nose and mouth have?

Your question is not evidence. Nor is such a question a basis upon which a juror could validly reason that the duct tape was the instrument of death.

(Questions do not constitute evidence, period.)

 

[Brini]

What evidence establishes the duct tape as the instrument of death?

The placing of the tape, plus the Huck decision. As has been discussed.

Neither would suffice in the absence of the other.

 

[ZsaZsa]

If you obstruct breathing death will result. The duct tape on the face of a dead child is the evidence. The only function of that duct tape was to obstruct breathing. The person that applied that duct tape caused her death.
If you do not understand the connection between applying duct tape to seal off the airway then there is nothing I can say to convince you, nor do I wish to. I am quite sure a Jury will understand the correlation. The manner of death was homicide.

 

[Brini]

Your question is not evidence. Nor is such a question a basis upon which a juror could validly reason that the duct tape was the instrument of death.

(Questions do not constitute evidence, period.)

However, the fact that she states IN her question is evidence.

 

[Wudge]

SNIP

The only function of that duct tape was to obstruct breathing. The person that applied that duct tape caused her death.

SNIP

Who said that and will so testify?

(That would be evidence.)

 

[snowbun]

The placing of the tape, plus the Huck decision. As has been discussed.

Neither would suffice in the absence of the other.

Thank you for all your posts. ITA btw.
Sorry I am only able to fly by here to mostly read through lurking...but I come as often as possible to support justice for Caylee.

 

[snowbun]

If you obstruct breathing death will result. The duct tape on the face of a dead child is the evidence. The only function of that duct tape was to obstruct breathing. The person that applied that duct tape caused her death.
If you do not understand the connection between applying duct tape to seal off the airway then there is nothing I can say to convince you, nor do I wish to. I am quite sure a Jury will understand the correlation. The manner of death was homicide.

Thanks to you too ZsaZsa. I appreciate all your posts. So many times you say exactly what goes through my head.

 

[Imbackon]

This will get lost somewhere I presume, or deleted.
But do any of you find yourselves writing posts, only to turn around and delete them b4 you send them, but somehow feel better anyway?
LOL

 

[snowbun]

Who said that and will so testify?

(That would be evidence.)

I think the ME will testify to the duct tape use and a reasonable conclusion being inferred from the placement of it.

 

[Imbackon]

Who said that and will so testify?

(That would be evidence.)

The prosecutor can in opening and closing statements.

ETA,
And when the jurors see the horrific photos of Caylee's little skull, with the tape across her face, KC will go down!

 

[Brini]

Who said that and will so testify?

(That would be evidence.)

No, that is DIRECT evidence (vs circumstantial).

If KC refuses to offer an explanation, the jury may assume Huck.

 

[lin]

Just so we're all understanding the legal requirements, the mechanism of death is not necessary to convict.

"7.2 MURDER—FIRST DEGREE
§ 782.04(1)(a), Fla. Stat.

When there will be instructions on both premeditated and felony murder, the following explanatory paragraph should be read to the jury.

There are two ways in which a person may be convicted of first degree murder. One is known as premeditated murder and the other is known as felony murder. To prove the crime of First Degree Premeditated Murder, the State must prove the following three elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

1. (Victim) is dead.

2. The death was caused by the criminal act of (defendant).

3. There was a premeditated killing of (victim)."

See page 115 of the Florida Standard Jury Instructions, here.

#1 is already clearly established to most except CA and DC, is my understanding. #2 and #3 are the subject of varying opinions but it appears to me that there is less and less dispute about these and more discovery is released.

Important: Just as many here have done, the jury will draw inferences and may use their reasoned conclusions or inferences based on the evidence to reach a verdict of guilty. In fact, there are some specific references to inferences in jury instructions, for example, repeated in a few different places:

"If a person has exclusive possession of a thing, knowledge of its presence may be inferred or assumed."

Sort of like KC's exclusive possession of that car with Caylee in the trunk, kwim?

 

[whisperOFwings]

This will get lost somewhere I presume, or deleted.
But do any of you find yourselves writing posts, only to turn around and delete them b4 you send them, but somehow feel better anyway?
LOL

~~hugs~~ :blowkiss:

 

[lin]

There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that there is no possibility that Judge S. or the eventual appellate panel will recede from the finding by the 5th DCA in Huck. There is no reasonable excuse for placing duct tape on a dead person. IIRC, the Court worded its opinion to include 'another human' instead of 'the victim' which indicates to me that the reasoning would apply to any similar circumstance.

Even Huck's lame assertions regarding atypical consensual sex seem more credible imo than do any assertions of an unreported staged kidnapping in this case. Some of my reasoning is there is clearly duct tape on the victim's nose as well as mouth but no other clearly discernible binding or restraint of the victim. There are not any items at the crime scene inconsistent with the family home that may be related to another perp or a place where the child may have been held. The TOD is estimated to be very soon after the last date seen. And again, all those other things that the smart sleuths wrote.

Even so, there is other evidence of premeditation. That KC didn't plan well doesn't prove she didn't plan at all.

Rather than belabor the points already made much better by other sleuths, I'll end this post by stating that I am very, very interested in the testimony of the recent addition to the state's witness list, JT. If his statement proves true, that window has been narrowed so much as to almost preclude anything other than deliberate murder, imo.