jojomonkey
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2008
- Messages
- 1,321
- Reaction score
- 1
Something of extreme importance was either lost in translation from officers of the courts mouths to these jurors ears .. OR ... What came out of the mouths of these officer's of the court fell completely on deaf ears..
It is one of the two, for that I am certain..
I will tell you the exact moment in time that my mind went, "uh-oh.. There is something wrong with what is happeni h here.."
That is when after HHJP had went thru each and every step, rule, amd procedure ending with him turning over the case to the jury for deliberations.. HHJP then dismissed the jurors with the task of beginning deliberations...
Did no one else here what happened after the jurors were excused to their deliberations.. Bailiff of the court notified HHJP THAT MANY OF THE JURORS DID NOT EVEN TAKE THEIR NOTEBOOKS CONTAINING THEIR NOTES FROM THE PAST LONG 7 WEEKS OF THE TRIAL..
This disturbed me greatly as IMO it did JP, too.. He didn't know what to say and at first was thinking that it must ONLY be the notebooks from the alternate jurors.. But he was told no, that left, too were the actual juror's notebooks and pens..
This is so very concerning to me.. It was then amd it really was after hearing the verdict..
The jury not only did not ask a single solitary question, clarification, a re-read of a transcript from the court clerk, or how about even looking at the evidence that as one of them said seemed to dispute SA's claim of 84 chloroform searches..
If even one of them thought that would not you want to see did it really dispute or negate SA's findings of 84 searches?
I'll tell you doesn't know the answer to this exact question I just asked and that's every single juror on this case.. The reality is they do not a clue as to whether there were indeed 84 chloroform searches or was there only 1 single solitary chloroform search as Baez claimed..
Not one of them knows the answer.. Becasue along with every other 340+ items evidence that was entered at trial THEY DID NOT EVEN SO MUCH AS GIVE A SONGLE ITEM OR WORD SOME MUCH AS EVEN A GLANCE OVER TO SEE FOR THEMSELVES WHAT THE TRUTH WAS..
SA says 84 chloroform searches with DT claiming there was ONLY 1.. now this very detail is of extreme importance would most not agree as 84 IMO shows a clear interest in How to make chloroform over and over in months preceding Caylee's death.. Now that is called premeditation..
Then Baez stating 1 time searched if infact true would
Be complete opposite and bode quite well for Casey and any premeditation..
Jury in charge of the case doesn't even now til this day were there 84 searches or just1??
That is of extreme concern to me and clearly shows that it can only be one of two things.. The two things at the beginning of the post..
Either way both lead to an injustice on Caylee's behalf.. But one would be an unintentional injustice by things just lost in translation..
The other would be much worse and much more concerning(or should be to us as a nation) and that is an intentional injustice on Caylee's behalf with the courts words falling on the deaf ears of the jury who for any number of various reasons felt they needed no assistance, nor needed to even check to verify exactly which side was being honest in telling how many chloroform searches.. For whatever reason there minds were made up and they didn't want, care, or need to check or verify something as so very minor as what would prove or disprove something so trivial as premeditation..<-oozing sarcasm..
Did anyone else notice this and have issue with it as I did???
There were far too many things that left questions that they did NOT question. There was a great need for clarification on numerous items of evidence. They did not deliberate and they knew they were not going to deliberate. It's blatant disregard for the rules that were imposed upon them.