Sidebar for Caylee Anthony's forum #15

[ZsaZsa]

IMO- Nobody interviewing JB is going to ask him hard questions. They don't have him on their shows to get him to clear things up - they have him on because they believe people will continue to watch the circus show.

The OWN/Discovery Network joint venture has struggled with ratings since its debute. I will now remove it from my "favorites" list. I hope it completely fails.

I so agree. She gushed about him all during the trial,so I am sure she will do the same during this 'interview'. I bet she had to promise him not to ask any difficult questions! If she were to ask him about the fool-proof suffocation searches I think I can guess what he'll say. He's never told the truth and there's no reason to think he will start now.

 

[ThinkTank]

I so agree. She gushed about him all during the trial,so I am sure she will do the same during this 'interview'. I bet she had to promise him not to ask any difficult questions! If she were to ask him about the fool-proof suffocation searches I think I can guess what he'll say. He's never told the truth and there's no reason to think he will start now.

I soooo wish any reporter/journalist would make themselves knowledgeable of Tony Pipitone's report on the fool proof suffocation evidence, and when the defense attorney lies, the journalist would counter with the evidence that AZLawyer and JWG found and wipe out what the attorney said with proven FACT.

It is wrong and slanted to only allow one side of a case.
I wish Aphrodite would interview Tony Pipitone and AZLawyer and JWG.

I bet AJ is going to have snippets of "interview" with jurors also and probably the Anthonys too [she said "others close to the case"]. She has already said she is going to find out from the attorney the "TRUE" answers and how the "JURY" saw things that the rest of the world "missed".
She also already said this was "maybe" an "accident gone wrong".
She is basically saying that she believes the attorney and believes the jury got it right.

On Twitter, last August, Aphrodite is willing to accept the "accident" LIE.
Twitter
Aphrodite Jones @Aphrodite_Jones
Aug 9, 2011
Today is Caylee's birthday. She would be 6. Wonder how #caseyanthony can live with herself. Could it have been an accident gone wrong? Maybe


promo for show:
"The episode is called “Casey Anthony Bella Vita.”
"Investigation Discovery provided this preview: “The Caylee Anthony story is all-too familiar as are her mother’s bizarre lies surrounding the little girl’s tragic death. It is also a story of an outraged nation, an overconfident prosecution, and a verdict that sent shock waves throughout America. Like many, Aphrodite was outraged with the jury’s verdict, but now, she sits down with defense lawyer Jose Baez and others close to the case to find the true answer to the question: What did the jury see that so many others missed?”""

 

[IfIMay]

Aphrodite is as much of a joke as Baez himself. They belong together in the armpit of journalism on OWN.

 

[krkrjx]

Aphrodite is as much of a joke as Baez himself. They belong together in the armpit of journalism on OWN.

I wonder when this Aphrodite/Baez interview would have been taped...before the recently uncovered evidence, or after.

I doubt Baez is going to allow anyone to ask him difficult questions so most likely AJ did whatever was necessary to get him to speak to her, and likely that means she had to ignore some glaringly obvious truths.

I agree that if Aphrodite (or anyone in the media) really wants to do a serious interview--one that gets as close to the truth as possible--they would be wise to not interview anyone who was/is a major player in the case (family, attorney, or the killer herself). Because, seriously, there are only two reasons to even do any type of broadcast on this case anymore: For publicity/ratings, or to get to the truth of the matter.

Interviewing Baez is not going to get to the truth of the matter, and since that is who Aphrodite has chosen to interview, it would appear she is not as interested in publicizing the truth as she would like us to believe she is. But I suppose that could depend on whether she interviewed anyone else for the same program.

We have heard enough lies and runaround and attorney-speak, and IMO if that's all Aprhodite's interview consists of, it is going to be just another waste of airwaves.

 

[com n sense]

What did the jury see that so many others missed?”""


Well let's see... they seen the dessert lady, they seen dollar signs & interviews, they seen DisneyLand trips & limos, they seen fame & fortune & going down in history......

 

[krkrjx]

What did the jury see that so many others missed?”""


Well let's see... they seen the dessert lady, they seen dollar signs & interviews, they seen DisneyLand trips & limos, they seen fame & fortune & going down in history......

The question should be: Why did the jury miss what most everyone else saw?

 

[Steely Dan]

What did the jury see that so many others missed?”""


Well let's see... they seen the dessert lady, they seen dollar signs & interviews, they seen DisneyLand trips & limos, they seen fame & fortune & going down in history......

:giggle:

The question should be: Why did the jury miss what most everyone else saw?

:thumb:

 

[watcher9]

It's probably going to be a rerun of a bunch of tapes we have already seen under other names with maybe a small interview with JB added in.

 

[krkrjx]

It's probably going to be a rerun of a bunch of tapes we have already seen under other names with maybe a small interview with JB added in.

I do not plan to watch the show. I do not care to see any of their faces ever again.

 

[logicalgirl]

"True Crime With Aphrodite Jones," on Investigation Discovery
Casey Anthony episode will air at 10 p.m. Jan. 14, 2012 - “Casey Anthony Bella Vita.”
" she sits down with defense lawyer Jose Baez and others close to the case to find the true answer to the question: What did the jury see that so many others missed?”"

On Twitter, last August, Aphrodite is willing to accept the "accident" LIE.
Twitter
Aphrodite Jones @Aphrodite_Jones
Aug 9, 2011
Today is Caylee's birthday. She would be 6. Wonder how #caseyanthony can live with herself. Could it have been an accident gone wrong? Maybe

IMO ... DISCOVERY should at least make the "Casey Anthony episode" honest and fair by including Pipitone's research confirming that CaseyA did the searches for foolproof suffocation [not George] - proving she planned and researched Caylee's murder by suffocation. It was NO accident. DISCOVERY should not give Baez a platform to publish his lies, without counter balancing it with other evidence that disputes what Baez says.

Interesting fact: Oprah's network "OWN" is in a "50/50 joint venture" with DISCOVERY Communications. "OWN" replaced the Discovery Health Channel.

WKMG Pipitone 5-page report
http://www.clickorlando.com/news/Co...nce/-/1637132/17495808/-/9rrlr7z/-/index.html

on YOUTUBE
Pipitone2 - YouTube

NANCY GRACE report
http://www.hlntv.com/video/2012/11/26/web-sleuth-uncovers-tot-mom-bombshell

http://s439.photobucket.com/albums/qq120/cayleecross/?action=view¤t=1aaPipitonetimeline2.jpg
Pipitone 5 page report
CLICK "NEXT" to see following 14 photos

http://s439.photobucket.com/albums/qq120/cayleecross/?action=view¤t=12aaPipitonetimeline5.jpg
KC on FB, MySpace, AOL IM, Google

On June 16, 2008 Casey Anthony was on the home computer using her own password protected account, while her parents did not have a password protected account, Casey using the Mozilla Firefox browser while her parents used the Internet Explorer browser.

Casey was on her own Facebook, her own MySpace, her own AOL Instant Messenger, in the same timeframe that Google searches were done for "FOOLPROOF SUFFOCATION".

The Google searches were done at 2:51:04 / 2:51pm [not at 1:51pm as Baez tries to say]. Baez' computer expert used an older version of NetAnalysis and did not manually add a bias for time zone and daylight savings time, which threw off the time by one hour.

George Anthony was at work at the time of the FOOLPROOF SUFFOCATION searches.
Cellphone records and text confirm that Casey was at the house.

The prosecution did not have this info at the time of trial. This new info was discovered by AZLawyer and JWG and Tony Pipitone and published November 19, 2012.

Thanks for this information ThinkTank, however I've had my fill of watching Baez in an interview even for a 60 second spot. His attitude while he tries once again to skirt around the issue is more than I can take.

But if anyone else watches it and wants to give us a report - I'd like to read that!:seeya:

 

[logicalgirl]

The question should be: Why did the jury miss what most everyone else saw?

I was reading about some very interesting research done on "group" decisions compared to individual decision making - both given the exact information. I'll find the book and give you some quotes - but basically it said that we are so socially geared to fear group criticism and group rejection, all unconsciously, that our brain activity during decision making actually changes dramatically from when we study the same information and make a decision by ourselves. It was amazing and ....freaky.

I'll bring back some quotes in the next day or so. But so much for group brainstorming and group panel decisions.

 

[krkrjx]

I was reading about some very interesting research done on "group" decisions compared to individual decision making - both given the exact information. I'll find the book and give you some quotes - but basically it said that we are so socially geared to fear group criticism and group rejection, all unconsciously, that our brain activity during decision making actually changes dramatically from when we study the same information and make a decision by ourselves. It was amazing and ....freaky.

I'll bring back some quotes in the next day or so. But so much for group brainstorming and group panel decisions.

I am familiar with this kind of research, not first-hand, but by having read about it. I totally can see it in many people, even myself in some situations.

It is human nature to desire the company of other humans, and the best way to ensure you have that is to do whatever it takes to fit in. We are conditioned from very young ages to conform rather than chart out own course. Example of that might be a middle-school girl who feels her life is over if she does not have the same shoes, or bag, or jacket (or whatever) as her classmates.

Most people will hide their true feelings at least some of the time, depending on the situation and if that is what it takes to fit in with a given group. I highly respect any individual who is not afraid to stand alone in their beliefs because that is an extremely difficult thing to do in most circumstances.

While in most circumstances that we as humans find ourselves in day to day, a decision to run with the pack rather than stand alone is not going to harm anyone, there are situations where it may and often does have a negative affect. Jury duty is certainly one such situation. We hear of hung juries where there is only one holdout, but more often than not in such cases the last juror still standing up for what they believe is swayed to run with the pack (change their vote). Two holdouts can also be swayed but it takes a bit more effort to do so because two holdouts will take strength from each other (that whole strength in numbers bit comes into play here).

I believe there were holdouts on this jury at the end of deliberation day. After the initial vote which was IIRC 7-5, any jurors against the death penalty whittled away at those who were convinced of guilt.

The verdict did not have much if anything to do with lack of evidence or the state not proving their case. It was more about personality types in the deliberation room. The stronger personalities were able to persuade the weaker personalities. Had the stronger personalities been on the other side, they would have persuaded those voting not guilty to change their votes to guilty.

Jurors can claim insufficient evidence all they want. But the truth is, there were some who knew there was sufficient evidence, because they initially voted guilty. I do not think they were really ever convinced that they were mistaken; I think they simply conformed because it was the easiest and most comfortable thing for them to do. This tragedy did not happen to anyone in their family so it was not as important to them as being labeled an outcast in that little group, IMO.

 

[atthelake]

Kr...one of the reasons that I do not join the group discussions on the Connecticut thread here at WS. I guess I do not have the strenght or desire right now to challenge some. Sooo many....ignorant opinions IMHO. I have pretty much just shut down and the whole thread is becoming noise to me.

 

[skbsoccermom]

I was reading about some very interesting research done on "group" decisions compared to individual decision making - both given the exact information. I'll find the book and give you some quotes - but basically it said that we are so socially geared to fear group criticism and group rejection, all unconsciously, that our brain activity during decision making actually changes dramatically from when we study the same information and make a decision by ourselves. It was amazing and ....freaky.

I'll bring back some quotes in the next day or so. But so much for group brainstorming and group panel decisions.

There was a good article written about this right after the verdict. I think it was written by Marcia Clark, and it was about 'group think'. I believe that is part of what went wrong with this jury and I whole-heartedly believe that the stronger, more stubborn ones persuaded the weaker ones.
When I heard some of those jurors during jury selection, I was worried. One of the women was asked to describe herself and she said "well, my kids say I'm a good mother?". She answered it as though it were questionable! I thought at that very instant that she would never be able to hold her own in a jury room. I have some things I'd like to say about some of the other jurors, but I'll keep it to myself because it's not very kind. Speaking about those 12 brings out the worst in me.

 

[logicalgirl]

I am familiar with this kind of research, not first-hand, but by having read about it. I totally can see it in many people, even myself in some situations.

It is human nature to desire the company of other humans, and the best way to ensure you have that is to do whatever it takes to fit in. We are conditioned from very young ages to conform rather than chart out own course. Example of that might be a middle-school girl who feels her life is over if she does not have the same shoes, or bag, or jacket (or whatever) as her classmates.

Most people will hide their true feelings at least some of the time, depending on the situation and if that is what it takes to fit in with a given group. I highly respect any individual who is not afraid to stand alone in their beliefs because that is an extremely difficult thing to do in most circumstances.

While in most circumstances that we as humans find ourselves in day to day, a decision to run with the pack rather than stand alone is not going to harm anyone, there are situations where it may and often does have a negative affect. Jury duty is certainly one such situation. We hear of hung juries where there is only one holdout, but more often than not in such cases the last juror still standing up for what they believe is swayed to run with the pack (change their vote). Two holdouts can also be swayed but it takes a bit more effort to do so because two holdouts will take strength from each other (that whole strength in numbers bit comes into play here).

I believe there were holdouts on this jury at the end of deliberation day. After the initial vote which was IIRC 7-5, any jurors against the death penalty whittled away at those who were convinced of guilt.

The verdict did not have much if anything to do with lack of evidence or the state not proving their case. It was more about personality types in the deliberation room. The stronger personalities were able to persuade the weaker personalities. Had the stronger personalities been on the other side, they would have persuaded those voting not guilty to change their votes to guilty.

Jurors can claim insufficient evidence all they want. But the truth is, there were some who knew there was sufficient evidence, because they initially voted guilty. I do not think they were really ever convinced that they were mistaken; I think they simply conformed because it was the easiest and most comfortable thing for them to do. This tragedy did not happen to anyone in their family so it was not as important to them as being labeled an outcast in that little group, IMO.

Oh good - glad you also know of the research. The book is called Quiet - subtitled The Power of Introverts in a World That Can't Stop Talking, by Susan Cain.

I am finding the book really interesting because after all these years it certainly explains a lot of things about my personality that have often made me feel kind of freaky. The most obvious one is that social gatherings that are high energy, full of lots of talking, even sharing of ideas leave me exhausted. And since I work in a business that is constantly interacting with people, and because I am also in "sales" or "consulting" so need to be "on" during the business day - I do "hermit" because I need to recharge. There's your basic description of an introvert - because an extrovert will feel exactly the opposite - recharged and ready for more.

The research actually went beyond persuasion by the stronger ones - the researchers were measuring brain activity during both examples - on a single person making a decision based on choices, and group members making the decision based on the identical information. Each "group", the single and the group member had far different brain activity - really very interesting at least to me.

And who knew scientists have proven brain storming doesn't work because extroverts will always lead the pack, with thoughts that both have value and don't have value, because of their need to be spontaneous.

It is hard also to be in a group discussion - for me - because if a group agrees and I don't - I feel like I am literally being pulled in a direction I refuse to go in - like a piece of toffee or something. But as some may have noticed - :blushing: I was also born with a strong stubborn streak. It can make me unpopular - noted - but at peace with my decisions - unless I find more information of course...:floorlaugh:

 

[logicalgirl]

There was a good article written about this right after the verdict. I think it was written by Marcia Clark, and it was about 'group think'. I believe that is part of what went wrong with this jury and I whole-heartedly believe that the stronger, more stubborn ones persuaded the weaker ones.
When I heard some of those jurors during jury selection, I was worried. One of the women was asked to describe herself and she said "well, my kids say I'm a good mother?". She answered it as though it were questionable! I thought at that very instant that she would never be able to hold her own in a jury room. I have some things I'd like to say about some of the other jurors, but I'll keep it to myself because it's not very kind. Speaking about those 12 brings out the worst in me.

No no soccermom - hit me with anything...:bigfight: but not Marcia Clark!!! Ack...:banghead:
Ms. Vanity -Where is my camera Clark!!

 

[logicalgirl]

Tis the Season My Good and Imaginary Friends.....

With Peace and Love

Let me wish you all a

artyguy2: :fireworks: HAPPY NEW YEAR! :fireworks:artyguy2:

 

[Nore]

No no soccermom - hit me with anything...:bigfight: but not Marcia Clark!!! Ack...:banghead:
Ms. Vanity -Where is my camera Clark!!

---------------
Hi, if I live to be a hundred years old I will never figure out how they chose that jury. There were so many things wrong! I saw it when they were picking them. I have never been on a jury have never chose any part of one but I do have a brain.(for what it's worth) One taking a trip, promised she/he would be off in time.How the he!! could anyone including a judge know that? one was a felon if I remember correctly, one didnt believe in the death penalty~ in a death penalty case. They couldnt wait to get out of there. To me that is not a proper Jury.:seeya:

 

[LolaMoon08]

I can't believe it will be 2013. I joined this forum in December 2008. How time flies! Our Caylee would be turning 8-years-old this coming year. I bet she would have loved reading. She may have even experienced her first little girl crush on someone from that group, One Direction, or Justin Bieber.

It's still so depressing. I will never get over this case. I am convinced.

 

[Pattymarie]

Just saw the commercial for the "World Premier of Prosecuting Casey Anthony" Airs Sat. Jan 19. I shuddered.