Premeditation

[JBean]

No, you haven't missed anything. COD is still undetermined and manner of death is still homicide.

Jurors are suppossed to use common sense and decide guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, not beyond any doubt what so ever. My common sense tells me there is no reason for 3 pieces of duct tape to be over a 2 year old's nose and mouth except for causing harm to said 2 year old.

But did the tape cause her death? That seems to be the basis for the claim of premeditation.
My point is that if the tape is the smoking gun for premeditation but we cannot show that tape cause her death,how does that play into common sense?

I am not challenging that the tape was placed on Caylee's face for any reason that is acceptable. But I cannot say with certainty that the tape was placed there to kill her.

 

[JBean]

Wudge, I think you just get a kick out of having an opposite opinion...right?
You say Casey will be found innocent....with all of the evidence and everything else involved in this case there is just no way a person with any common sense could possibly believe that. I do believe that you have common sense...don't you...lol? Come on...fess up.

If I understand it correctly,Wudge is not saying that Casey is necessarily innocent of killing Caylee, but innocent of premeditated murder as that is what she is charged with.

 

[darnudes]

Well, I am just going to stick with I don't know.

I don't know when the duct tape was placed on Caylee. I don't know if the Caylee's death was an accident or murder. I will wait until the state produce all their evidence or Casey cops a plea.

 

[celticthyme]

your post has put me in deep thought about this now. We know there were other pieces of duct tape found. I am not sure where they were found exactly. Were they found in the bag with Caylee? Were they found outside the bag in the area? I would say either way, we know animals had gotten to the bag and could have chewed the tape and it also deteriorated. I would never assume, with only the facts we know now, that Caylee was NOT bound at least on the hands. Does anyone know more about other pieces of tape found? I will be doing a lot of searching on this.
Because for whatever reason, we KNOW Caylee's mouth and nose were covered with duct tape. I can see NO reason for EVER EVER doing that unless with a callous, evil and premeditated intent! What else would one think would happen, putting duct tape over a child's mouth and nose?

Unfortunately, we need to remember that animals carried the baby's lower limbs away from the bag area. If there was tape on them, it would not have necessarily been with the bags.

 

[Imbackon]

What I mean is, if the duct tape was applied in such a way as to cause death and if what you say is true, that there is no way that it could not have caused her death, then why didn't the ME rule that as the cause of death?

Circumstantial evidence may lead jurors to believe this was the cause of death.
Dr. G did say that it was applied prior to decomp, so it had to have been applied within a day or so after death or was the actual cause of death.
With no evidence to support any other cause of death, the juror's are free to come up with this conclusion on their own, and it is perfectly acceptable for them to do so because it was deemed by the courts ok to assume duct tape across the nose and mouth is not needed for any other reason other than to cause death.

 

[Wudge]

Wudge, I'm sorry, but what is the difference between you imagining that one must bind someone's hands in order to put duct tape across their mouth, and someone else's "imagining" that she could have straddled or drugged Caylee in order to apply the duct tape.

Imagine is just another way of saying deducing (To reach (a conclusion) by reasoning) which is perfectly acceptable and necessary.

The duct tape itself is evidence, but without reasoning, EVIDENCE MEANS NOTHING. Even if you had the murder on videotape, you still need to use some form of deductive reasoning to come to the conclusion that what you viewed, was in fact the act of murdering someone.

Without deductive reasoning we are nothing more than bricks.

Deduction and imagination are very, very different. Imagination is boundless. Deduction requires major and minor premises, and the reliability of the necessary conclusion cannot exceed the reliability of the premises.

What highly reliable and true premises bring you to what conclusion?

 

[Brini]

I just go over all the facts that we do know about Casey. From day one she has tried to blame the imaginary nanny. I belive she had been working on her kidnap story the day she killed Caylee or Caylee died in an accident due to some inattention on behalf of Casey. It is no stretch for me to think she was trying to stage this by adding the duct tape to further her kidnapping story.

I think there are many possible scenarios and I am open to all of them.

Maybe faking a kidnapping is the explanation the defense will use. Let's see if they can sell it to a jury.

 

[Snaz]

To think that Caylee's hands were tied, one would have to believe that LE and the D.A.'s office decided to withhold smoking gun evidence while leaking everything else. That's not how D.A.s play high-profile cases.

FWIW

(You might enjoy happenstance over serendipity.)

BBM

With all due respect because maybe you are not aware, the State has not "leaked" anything. Everything has been released pursuant to the the State of Florida Sunshine Law. And there are exemptions to that law........

Perhaps you would like to have a look at the Sunshine law:

http://www.myflsunshine.com/sun.nsf/pages/Law

 

[Brini]

Well, I am just going to stick with I don't know.

I don't know when the duct tape was placed on Caylee. I don't know if the Caylee's death was an accident or murder. I will wait until the state produce all their evidence or Casey cops a plea.

"I don't know," is a perfectly respectable answer. "I will wait," is another one.

 

[Wudge]

SNIP

because it was deemed by the courts ok to assume duct tape across the nose and mouth is not needed for any other reason other than to cause death.

What court ruled on the facts in this case?

 

[Brini]

What court ruled on the facts in this case?

State of Florida vs Brent Robert Huck.

 

[cecybeans]

Oh! I thought we did not know the cause of death.

ETA: Has Dr G named the death as cause by suffocation or whatever it would be? I have embarrassingly missed that and would appreciate it of someone could bring me up to speed.

Oh Great Bean, you are of course right. We may never have COD. However, I've always wondered why Dr. G said Caylee's death was a homicide. Simple use of duct tape would not indicate that, as it could have been a cover-up for kidnapping or some other reason as many have postulated.

If there is evidence that duct tape was put on her while she was alive, and there is both evidence of a live body and a dead body in the trunk, I'd think it's logical to assume that death may have occurred in the trunk regardless of exact cause. The very presence of duct tape around Caylee's mouth and nose, while not definitely COD, would indicate it was not an accident and could have contributed to her death - particularly if evidence of a live body in the trunk exists. It indicates at the very least that, since it is a felony to put a child in the trunk (or even leave them in a car in FL) and death occurred at or around the same time (due to entomological evidence perhaps) that an exact COD is irrelevant if a homicide can be established due to the concomitant conditions. JMHO.

 

[darnudes]

Maybe faking a kidnapping is the explanation the defense will use. Let's see if they can sell it to a jury.

I can see them possibly going with the accident theory then staged kidnapping of Caylee by Casey as she was so traumatised and so forth, didn't know what to do, couldn't explain it to parents and panicked.

Don't know how they would play this out but lets face it, she does not have a lot of options left to explain the evidence which would make sense to a sane and reasonable person. They are going to have to come up with something better than the nanny, JG, AH, RM or some other poor person.

 

[Wudge]

BBM

With all due respect because maybe you are not aware, the State has not "leaked" anything. Everything has been released pursuant to the the State of Florida Sunshine Law. And there are exemptions to that law........

Perhaps you would like to have a look at the Sunshine law:

http://www.myflsunshine.com/sun.nsf/pages/Law

Accordingly, there should be no unknown (unleaked) smoking gun.

TY

 

[cecybeans]

Deduction and imagination are very, very different. Imagination is boundless. Deduction requires major and minor premises, and the reliability of the necessary conclusion cannot exceed the reliability of the premises.

What highly reliable and true premises bring you to what conclusion?

Well, let's compromise and call them deductive versus inductive reasoning; it sounds a bit kinder semantically.

We are all using inductive reasoning to come up with possible scenarios, (including your pool water theory) and hoping we can deductively support our theories with physical evidence (or the lack thereof). All I am saying is that there is more than one logical possibility for the lack of physical restraint evidence at the scene. Just as there is more than one possibility for the concentration of chloroform in the trunk. As long as our "imagination" does not contradict the evidence at the scene, we should entertain the idea of a reasonable theory as a possibility.

 

[Imbackon]

Brini found the case.
You guys are too fast for me to keep up

 

[JBean]

Oh Great Bean, you are of course right. We may never have COD. However, I've always wondered why Dr. G said Caylee's death was a homicide. Simple use of duct tape would not indicate that, as it could have been a cover-up for kidnapping or some other reason as many have postulated.

If there is evidence that duct tape was put on her while she was alive, and there is both evidence of a live body and a dead body in the trunk, I'd think it's logical to assume that death may have occurred in the trunk regardless of exact cause. The very presence of duct tape around Caylee's mouth and nose, while not definitely COD, would indicate it was not an accident and could have contributed to her death - particularly if evidence of a live body in the trunk exists. It indicates at the very least that, since it is a felony to put a child in the trunk (or even leave them in a car in FL) and death occurred at or around the same time (due to entomological evidence perhaps) that an exact COD is irrelevant if a homicide can be established due to the concomitant conditions. JMHO.

hey bean sistah
I don't necessarily disagree with anything you have posted. But it does not prove premeditation,imo.
Caylee cries, KC puts tape over her mouth to make her quiet. Puts her in the trunk. Drives to another location to take her out and she is dead.
Is that premeditated murder? or just murder? Homicide? yes. Premeditation? Don't know.
To be clear, I have no preconceived notion on this aspect of the case. I am just looking at facts and trying to make a determination on premeditation.

 

[ThoughtElf]

I've never considered the duct tape to be the sole reason that I believe Caylee's murder was premeditated. As I understand the legal definition of prememdiation, the method used to commit homicide is not necessarily proof of premeditation.

If a person forms the intent to act (i.e. decides to cause harm to Caylee,) then if it can be shown that they were concious of their intent to act, it is premeditated.

The manner isn't that important. Well, the duct tape is a very important consideration for me personally, but I believe that Casey's crime was premeditated because she planned to kill Caylee and followed through. She might have stopped at any time to try to revive Caylee, call for help, remove her from the trunk or whatever fits your personal favoured scenario.

She thought about doing it. She conciously enacted upon that intent = premeditation according to my understanding of the legal definition.

 

[Imbackon]

I can see them possibly going with the accident theory then staged kidnapping of Caylee by Casey as she was so traumatised and so forth, didn't know what to do, couldn't explain it to parents and panicked.

Don't know how they would play this out but lets face it, she does not have a lot of options left to explain the evidence which would make sense to a sane and reasonable person. They are going to have to come up with something better than the nanny, JG, AH, RM or some other poor person.

Accident and cover up, only work if there is EVIDENCE OF SUCH, and since Casey did not keep one of bit evidence to this being an accident, intentional homicide is all that is left.
I said this before and don't mind repeating it.

If you accidentally kill your kid and leave their body out in the elements until they are skeletonized, then TOO BAD FOR YOU, boo hoo.

Shoulda called the police after your "accident" is the lesson.

 

[cyberborg]

Bottom line is that no one knows if that tape was put on Caylee before or after she died. If LE know or have evidence to support a theory either way they haven't released it yet. So all else is speculation and conjecture. No one here can definitively state when the duct tape was put on Caylee.

True, so the Prosecution cannot present a theory because it is speculation that currently lacks evidence but the Jury is going to imagine and speculate why in their minds, absent evidence and unless KC/Defense floats accidental death then .... homicide it is!

KC needs to act.