Premeditation

[Just Jayla]

hey bean sistah
I don't 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.

You are right as far as what we know for a fact about premiditation (if the traces of chloroform in the trunk are not weighty enough evidence-that could be premeditated if she Googled it then used it)
But I think as far as the DP, KC could receive it by virtue of placing tape over a child's mouth in that fashion anyway, even if she did not mean to kill her-the state could try her for felony homicide, I believe it is already one of her charges now...

 

[Rlaub44]

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

TY

Well, we are learning about new evidence with each document dump. There may very well be "smoking guns" to which we are not yet privy.

Although the SA must provide all discovery to the defense in a timely fashion, it is possible that they are saving the really big stuff for last. This provides less time for Baez to try to explain away the evidence to the media, and ratchets up the heat as we get closer to trial.

 

[cyberborg]

well, okay, leaking pool water.. if my kid was leaking pool water I would be strongly tempted to try to get the water out of her lungs.. and to call 911. I am not all that sharp, so I doubt it would occur to me to tape her mouth shut, just in case she managed to catch a breath somehow. But perhaps that is exactly what another mother would do under the circumstances.

Exactly!!! So many children who have drowned, thought dead have survived if you act to remove the water and perform CPR to try to revive them. It is human to try your best to save a life before writing it off and throwing it away as trash. Call 911 ASAP eh?

 

[darnudes]

hey bean sistah
I don't 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.

This is interesting:

Some murders involving extreme recklessness on the part of the defendant cause extreme public outrage. In People v. Dellinger, 783 P.2d 200 (Cal. 1989), the defendant, Leland Dellinger, was found guilty of the murder of his two-yearold stepdaughter. The primary cause of the child's death was a fractured skull caused by trauma to the head. However, other evidence showed that the child had large quantities of cocaine in her system when she died. Moreover, her mother discovered that the defendant had fed the child wine through a baby bottle. Due to the defendant's "wanton disregard for life," the verdict of murder was proper, according to the California Supreme Court.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Murder

 

[JBean]

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.

But what I am saying is that if I had to vote guilty on premeditated murder because there was tape on the head but not attached to any tissue showing exactly how it was applied, i don't think that is enough for me and would have to go with a lesser charge if available. Especially in a DP case.

 

[Wudge]

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.

I agree that we are dealing far more with induction than deduction. Nevertheless, my fanciful scenario was nothing more than imagination (at play).

 

[Imbackon]

I know this may sound harsh, but to be honest, I don't see a lot of difference between the horrible person who's child "accidentally" died, and then threw away their body, and went on to party and torture their family NOT KNOWING WHAT HAPPENED TO THE CHILD, then a parent who due to lack of sleep or whatever reason, throws their child to the ground in a rage, killing them.

 

[YellowSubmarine]

I'm also on the fence about the drug or sedative issue. If Caylee was given drugs or a sedative, why would the duct tape have been needed? It wouldn't have been to keep her from crying out and betraying the murderer...the only need I can think of would be to finish the job that the drugs or sedatives started.

This is exactly what I think happened. Maybe kc was afraid the drug/chloroform wouldn't work so she duct taped her just in case or maybe she just couldn't hold her down and tape her, so she gave her the drugs/sedatives to quiet her first.

I think all the discussion about if her hands and feet were bound is pointless. It wouldn't be impossible to tape her mouth without doing so to her feet and hands, so it doesn't really matter.

And, as others have pointed out, her tiny little bones were scattered. The pieces of duct tape found around the dump site could've easily been used, or something else taken away by animals.

 

[darnudes]

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.

Absolutely agree 100%, I was merely postulating what the defence might do or say.

 

[Jolynna]

Sure but she does not state if Caylee was alive or dead at the time the duct tape was placed on her. I don't want to be obnoxious, but I don't know why people are having a hard time understanding this.

I can easily think of a couple of scenarios whereby Casey could have put duct tape on Caylee after the fact for a specific reason.

When you find a child's skull with the mouth and nose taped over with duct tape, a reasonable inference is that the death was the result of criminal agency. Knowledge of the actual cause of death doesn't have to be known to establish corpus delecti (the fact of the crime having been committed).

There is more than enough here for the case to go before a jury.
imo

 

[Wudge]

Well, we are learning about new evidence with each document dump. There may very well be "smoking guns" to which we are not yet privy.

Although the SA must provide all discovery to the defense in a timely fashion, it is possible that they are saving the really big stuff for last. This provides less time for Baez to try to explain away the evidence to the media, and ratchets up the heat as we get closer to trial.

You mean save the best for last so as to maximize the poisoning of the jury pool.

(The Sunshine law is a prosecutor's dream come true. Of course, it was written by prosecutors. ... chuckle)

 

[strach304]

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.

I agree with this and then some. There are multiple incriminating computer searches. Her statements to George and Cindy that they would be staying with the nanny that night when she had plans with Tony. Those are clear indications of premeditation as well. Plenty more I'm sure I haven't even thought of. There's been so much info I can't even keep track anymore. I do know that drugging your child and putting her in the trunk without duct tape is sure to cause death. Casey wouldn't know that of course.

 

[Snaz]

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

TY

As I stated in my post, and you will find at the link I posted for you, there are exemptions to the release of evidence under the Sunshine Law.

 

[scratchthatitch]

I think the debate about a scenario involving an accidental death followed by a cover-up would only be settled by KC at the very least admitting to being present when Caylee died. Only then would a jury have to consider between the defense's stance that it was an accidental death and the state's position that it was intentional. Do I have that right?

 

[YellowSubmarine]

You mean save the best for last so as to maximize the poisoning of the jury pool.

(The Sunshine law is a prosecutor's dream come true. Of course, it was written by prosecutors. ... chuckle)

BBM -- The only poisoning of the jury pool we've seen is by JB and the A's. CA even admitted it recently. They go on tv and whine saying kc is being tried in the public court of opinion and then turn around and spew their made up "evidence" bs.

 

[Brini]

You mean save the best for last so as to maximize the poisoning of the jury pool.

(The Sunshine law is a prosecutor's dream come true. Of course, it was written by prosecutors. ... chuckle)

And, voted in by the people.

 

[Imbackon]

But what I am saying is that if I had to vote guilty on premeditated murder because there was tape on the head but not attached to any tissue showing exactly how it was applied, i don't think that is enough for me and would have to go with a lesser charge if available. Especially in a DP case.

Well,since they are never going to be able to show how it was applied due to not having any body tissue and the elements wreaking havoc, then I guess you would not vote for the DP.
I don't even know why we keep going back and forth on this premeditation point anyway, because I think I have read she can get the DP by virtue of Caylee's young age.

I am not a big fan of the DP anyway, as I don't think it is applied evenly enough, so for me it does not matter what they convict her of, just so long as they convict her and she gets hardtime for a LOOOOONNNNG time.

 

[Brini]

BBM -- The only poisoning of the jury pool we've seen is by JB and the A's. CA even admitted it recently. They go on tv and whine saying kc is being tried in the public court of opinion and then turn around and spew their made up "evidence" bs.

We also have not heard that they turned their discovery over to the state.

The state requested it more than 15 days ago.

 

[JBean]

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.

HI Thoughtelf. I am only responding to the notion that the duct tape proves premeditation, which has been presented in the OP and subsequent posts.

 

[Rlaub44]

You mean save the best for last so as to maximize the poisoning of the jury pool.

(The Sunshine law is a prosecutor's dream come true. Of course, it was written by prosecutors. ... chuckle)

We can argue all day about whether or not you like the Sunshine law, but it is the law, and prosecutors have no choice when media or citizens request the info.

On another matter, I just had a thought: In the Jon Benet case, investigators could tell that the duct tape was applied to her mouth while she was no longer conscious, due to the perfect lip prints that indicated no struggle against the tape.

Although it's horrible to think about, could the tape over Caylee's mouth have showed signs of movement underneath, thereby demonstrating to Dr. G that it was applied prior to death?