Pattymarie
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2008
- Messages
- 2,102
- Reaction score
- 0
By Gma Kat:
When I watched the show I felt the reaction of the reporter was shock that NG was being so snarky. I thought she did a great job of holding her composure as she professionally responded to such a unprofessional comment. I think she was offended by NG's comment. NG is not a reporter (obviously, by her sensationalising EVERYTHING) and shows her ignorance at times like these.
I think that she taped the chloroformed rag or what ever she put it on to Caylee's mouth and nose and then proceeded to smother her with a pillow. If Caylee was out because of the chloroform when she was smothered then she probably just stopped breathing without knowing what was happening to her. I hope and pray that that is what happened. Caylee would have just went to sleep and never woke up. I hope she just surprised her with the chloroform and Caylee was out before she realized that was happening too.
Didn't LE take a pillow from the Anthony's home during the last searches along with some bedding? LE must have found a treasure trove in that bag with Caylee. It seems to me like Casey didn't think that Caylee would ever be found. She sure has acted like it anyway.
After hearing all of the evidence....watching that tape of Caylee...and then hearing about Casey's behavior as soon as Caylee was dead...the jurors are going to despise her. If the Pros decides to go for the death penalty I really believe that the jury will go for it.
The problems I find with this news report are first the "sources close to the investigation" actually making these types of statements. I do agree that the investigators involved in this case in every deoartment have conducted themselves in a very professional and ethical manner. This leak doesn't match that pattern of behavior.
I also believe that these leaked statements actually hurt the prosecution more than the defense. The leak gives JB lots to complain about and drag this case on longer arguing that Casey is unable to receive a fair trial.
The reporter choosing to report info from these anonymous sources is acting solely with ratings in mind. She is to a sector of the public's insaitible appettite for real-life drama. The reporter has only served to give JB a good argument for Casey's sixth amendment rights being violated. Like it or not, we all are entitled to a fair trial. Her story throws yet another wrench, another wrinkle into this mess. And in my opinion that does NOTHING to help bring about swift justice for the victim (who has been completely lost in this media circus)...Caylee.
I firmly believe that the press does not have the right(and first amendment rights are not absolute) to print or broadcast a story that impinges upon or outright violates the sixth amendment rights of others. I think that the media has gotten out of control and needs to be reigned in. Report on the story AFTER their has been some documentation released by LE, not before. JB going to the press and having them report that he believes Casey is innocent is not the same as the press printing that LE have overwhelming evidence against and have declared her guilty of intentionally murdering her daughter. How on earth does she receive a fair trial after this reporter's "sources" from "close to the investigation" have already declared her 100% guilty?Originally Posted by azwriter
I personally used sources, some in the courts and cop shop beats, who willingly gave up information (or as you call it - leak) which when checked was true. They do it for many reasons - sometimes because the information is going to be released shortly anyway. Other times as part of a controlled plan to get certain facts out to the public eye and defense experts and attorneys. It happens all the time. What you need to understand, by "leaking" the information, that source or person, is working the case. They only release what they know can be reported without giving away the entire case's investigative results.
Casey is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. She will receive a fair trial. You call what is reported as irresponsible. However, it would be professionally irresponsible for the reporter to not include facts they have gathered from their sources.
You can bet the facts the reporter brings to the story are checked and backed up before they are aired or seen in print. Despite what you may think, the media is very aware of the consequences of reporting something that is false.
You do not believe the press has the right to report from its sources what has been said about the defendant's guilt; then that means you also believe the media should not be allowed to report what Casey's defense team and supporters have to say about her being innocent.
There are the cold hard facts in this case that are fairly ugly all by themselves. But it's the sensationalism that I find rather hard to stomach.
My post is in reply to discussions on the previous thread regarding accidental versus intentional death.
When the word accident is used in reference to Caylees death, I dont think most people are suggesting Casey is not accountable....Caylee may have had an accident and Casey could well have intentionally caused her death!
A simplistic example....If I went for a walk with someone out in the wilderness - say that person was Joe. Joe stumbled on a tree root and fell over a cliff by accident, it was not my fault that Joe fell over the cliff. I dont know if Joe is dead or alive and I cant see or hear him down there.
So I have two options:
>>>>I immediately call 911. Unfortunately Joe died on the way to the hospital. Was Joes death an accident? Yes he fell over a cliff. Im not charged as I did the right thing.
OR
>>>>I walk on my merry away and don't report the accident (for whatever reason - maybe Im scared someone will think I pushed him). I act like nothing happened and coverup the fact that Joe and I went for a walk. I tell people who wonder what happened to Joe that he told me he had planned a vacation in Barbados. When someone eventually finds Joes dead body its discovered he scrawled a note just before he died....paddieAB left me. So the police investigate and Im charged with murder. Was Joes death an accident? Yes or no? Did I intentionally cause his Joes death? Yes IMO because I deliberately walked away from the accident, I led people to believe he was on vacation and therefore no one was searching for him, and so I denied Joe the medical intervention that may have saved his life. Im guilty.
And so may be Casey IMO
Agreed. Far too much sensationalism and speculation there, here and everywhere.
What ever happen to "just the facts ma'am, just the facts".
My post is in reply to discussions on the previous thread regarding accidental versus intentional death.
When the word accident is used in reference to Caylees death, I dont think most people are suggesting Casey is not accountable....Caylee may have had an accident and Casey could well have intentionally caused her death!
A simplistic example....If I went for a walk with someone out in the wilderness - say that person was Joe. Joe stumbled on a tree root and fell over a cliff by accident, it was not my fault that Joe fell over the cliff. I dont know if Joe is dead or alive and I cant see or hear him down there.
So I have two options:
>>>>I immediately call 911. Unfortunately Joe died on the way to the hospital. Was Joes death an accident? Yes he fell over a cliff. Im not charged as I did the right thing.
OR
>>>>I walk on my merry away and don't report the accident (for whatever reason - maybe Im scared someone will think I pushed him). I act like nothing happened and coverup the fact that Joe and I went for a walk. I tell people who wonder what happened to Joe that he told me he had planned a vacation in Barbados. When someone eventually finds Joes dead body its discovered he scrawled a note just before he died....paddieAB left me. So the police investigate and Im charged with murder. Was Joes death an accident? Yes or no? Did I intentionally cause his Joes death? Yes IMO because I deliberately walked away from the accident, I led people to believe he was on vacation and therefore no one was searching for him, and so I denied Joe the medical intervention that may have saved his life. Im guilty.
And so may be Casey IMO
You painted that with a very broad brush, Wudge! I am offended.
It's well known that Nancy has a serious "all guilty, all the time" bend based on drastic and unsupportable leaps to conclusions. She certainly appeals to people with such a failing.
I tell law students to watch her show as a good example of a bad example.
It's well known that Nancy has a serious "all guilty, all the time" bend based on drastic and unsupportable leaps to conclusions. She certainly appeals to people with such a failing.
I tell law students to watch her show as a good example of a bad example.