The evidence failed Caylee, not the Jury.

[justanother]

I do not think this Jury took this decision lightly and i do not care who dropped out of school, who has a dui, who does what, when, where or how. They were chosen to take on the ultimate burden in this case and i am grateful that they sacrificed weeks of their lives to do so.

They saw all this evidence (including photos of her remains) and had it repeated to them a mind numbing amount of times. I don't believe 12 people came in with their minds already made up to her being not guilty. In fact i am sure some think she did do something but you can't find someone Guilty of 'something'.

They looked at what the Prosecution was offering and sadly for many, it turns out there just wasn't enough evidence. JA saying Caylee was taped three times and demonstrating how does not give a murder weapon. Hoping she used Chloroform does not prove she did. Presenting computer searches as evidence of premeditation and then having that stomped on before the jury does not prove premeditation.

The Prosecution did what they could with what they had but in the end it wasn't enough.

 

[songline]

ITA
And I remember that George said long long ago "You cant tie KC to anything"
And the jury had nothing to work with. Many things were not let in...that was the judges call.
I think the most she would have gotten - had the judge let other evidence in would have been
a case of NEGLIGENCE not murder.
Also IMHO the state could have done a better job.
:floorlaugh: I think they thought that JB was a ding bat and he used that to his advantage.
Brilliant closing JB.

CAYLEE was tossed by her family is what brakes my heart.
If she drowned and ended up in a ditch, no stranger did that.

 

[ehough22]

I am personally tired of this argument, stated as fact. It is not a fact that there wasn't enough evidence. Hundreds, thousands of people watched the same evidence and felt there was enough to convict her. So no, it isn't a fact that the evidence failed. Common sense failed. Caylee's justice was in the hands of these 12 people and they did not deliver. Absolutely people are going to be upset with them, and for good reason. I understand that some people believe the evidence isn't there. But conversely, some people believe it is, and that's where the frustration lies.

 

[sleutherer]

Disagree.

Jury fail.

 

[Katana]

The evidence was there and if they didn't understand the technical jargon then common sense was all they needed.

 

[wfgodot]

The constant demonizing of the jury is outrageous; the state overcharged this case and subsequently failed its burden of proof.

 

[Linda7NJ]

The state did a fantastic job, the evidence was overwhelming and they did prove their case beyond a REASONABLE doubt....

I know what happened to Caylee and it wasn't an accidental drowning. I know there was chloroform in that trunk and duct tape on Caylee's nose and mouth. I know how Caylee's body was transported to the swamp. I know who dumped her like garabge and when the car stunk so bad Casey dumped that too. If the jurors couldn't figure that out...they're a bunch of <modsnip>. imo

 

[mydailyopinions]

I completely disagree! The jury took the accidental drowning theory and ran with it.

Anyone with common sense would know that ALL the evidence needed to be evaluated. They allowed a murderer to come into court and continue lying to the world and to them just as she did to LE.

They never asked to see or watch anything over again! Nothing, nodda! They took this theory and decided that they wanted to go home as soon as possible.

Caylee was imaginary to them as well. Just like with the man that Casey claimed to be her Father, Caylee should have been placed on that board in front of them as well...without a face...only a skull with duct tape around it's nose and mouth.

 

[pvaldez]

I disagree. 31 days is more than enough evidence and there was much more. Jury failed to use common sense. In addition they did not give the deliberation process the time Caylee deserved. The verdict came in too quickly for due process.

 

[justanother]

I think you all give ICA far too much credit for being able to outsmart the entire legal system.

 

[TotallyObsessed]

I couldn't disagree more with the title of this thread.

 

[pinkflamingo]

The jury did not take notes, bring their notebooks, and did not request to see the evidence. When I was on jury duty, I took pages of notes, as did EVERY OTHER PERSON on the jury. We deliberated for a day, looked at the evidence, drew pictures, figured out with diagrams. We started out saying he was guilty, and wanted to make sure. We ended up sending him to prison for life, but due to lack of evidence, we did not charge him for theft of firearm as there was a lack of evidence. My point is, we did not know this was a life in prison case, it was not mentioned to us, but we took it very seriously. This jury did not take many notes, did not bring notebooks, did not request to see the evidence and did not request office supplies during deliberation. This suggests to me that they were not serious, not basing this on anything other than emotion. I am sorry, but anyone who cannot have the personal ambition to finish high school in this day and age does not belong on a jury, especially a jury that deals with high tech scientific data. Would you want these people judging you based on their actions?

 

[Kavya01]

I am personally tired of this argument, stated as fact. It is not a fact that there wasn't enough evidence. Hundreds, thousands of people watched the same evidence and felt there was enough to convict her. So no, it isn't a fact that the evidence failed. Common sense failed. Caylee's justice was in the hands of these 12 people and they did not deliver. Absolutely people are going to be upset with them, and for good reason. I understand that some people believe the evidence isn't there. But conversely, some people believe it is, and that's where the frustration lies.

200% ITA. Wise words. Bolded by me.

 

[mydailyopinions]

I think you all give ICA far too much credit for being able to outsmart the entire legal system.

I don't give her credit at all.

Her lies outsmarted 12 jurors. Just as her lies outsmarted her parents.
Neither of which have a lick of common sense.

 

[GhostCrab]

I agree with the verdict. In fact I applaud this jury for being able to leave out their emotion, <modsnip>.

Also, the state attorney said at the press conference yesterday that ALL the evidence was put before this jury, <modsnip>.

 

[Trident]

The evidence was there and if they didn't understand the technical jargon then common sense was all they needed.

I understood the technical jargon quite well, but it convinced me of nothing. This case was built on a prosecution scenario, supposedly bolstered by "new", untried "science". That, I believe was a big mistake. Some day this new "science" may be accepted, or not, but it did nothing to convince me, and obviously not the jurors either.

What did they really have - iffy chloroform, iffy duct tape, which I believe was on the bag and got attached to the skull and hair when the same came out of the bag. They had no cause of death, no time of death, no finger prints, no DNA, no witnesses, no nothing to tie Casey or anyone else to the body.

Common sense? The state brought a case against Casey, howled for her life, but they didn't prove it. The jury, and all of us were asked to believe what the state accused her of, but their proof wasn't conclusive beyond a reasonable doubt. End of story - Casey cannot be tried again for murdering her daughter.

My opinion only

 

[TxLady2]

I am personally tired of this argument, stated as fact. It is not a fact that there wasn't enough evidence. Hundreds, thousands of people watched the same evidence and felt there was enough to convict her. So no, it isn't a fact that the evidence failed. Common sense failed. Caylee's justice was in the hands of these 12 people and they did not deliver. Absolutely people are going to be upset with them, and for good reason. I understand that some people believe the evidence isn't there. But conversely, some people believe it is, and that's where the frustration lies.

Yes, hundreds of people watched the same evidence, BUT their opinions were influenced by the media hype and the court of public opinion. This jury was apparently not made up of people who watch Nancy Grace or HLN, or members of Websleuths. They based their decision on what was presented in trial. It was not enough, the state did not prove their case.


I agree with the OP, btw.

 

[JBounds]

The jurors may have seen all the evidence but they didn't look at one shred of evidence while deliberating. Sorry, but they had their minds made up before they went in that room. If they had looked at it all again then came to the conclusion of "Not Guilty" then I would give them a pass.

Also my mind was not made up by media hype or even NG. I can think logically on my own.Besides not all the media was hell bent on her being guilty I've seen both sides. It is my right to an opinion and she was guilty. If you believe she wasn't and teh evidence wasn't there for you then that is great.

 

[mydailyopinions]

I agree with the verdict. In fact I applaud this jury for being able to leave out their emotion, which obviously so many on this forum cannot do.

Also, the state attorney said at the press conference yesterday that ALL the evidence was put before this jury, so what are you all talking about when you say that this jury did not know all the facts.

All the evidence was not put forward! They never knew of Casey's stealing, writing bad checks and being convicted of doing so!

Even if it was all put forward, this jury didn't give a crap. They didn't ask for anything to view for themselves outside of the attorneys.

Give me a break.

 

[justanother]

The evidence was there and if they didn't understand the technical jargon then common sense was all they needed.

The technical evidence was questionable. The defense inserted enough doubt into it for it to fail. You cannot convict someone based on software/sniffing machines that may or may not work.