The evidence failed Caylee, not the Jury.

[jojomonkey]

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.

 

[Nova]

I just thought of something. I don't watch those CSI shows, but I do know there are WAY too many of them on TV nowadays, and I know a lot of people watch them.

What if that is a problem with the jurors in this case? They've watched far too many of these shows and need that "smoking gun" instead of working to analyze the evidence before them. They were looking for that "AHA" moment that pulled all the pieces together FOR them.

What if people are really becoming that simple, that they need that something shoved in their face that says "this person is 100% guilty" because they can't figure it out on their own. With the mountain of evidence, pointing to Casey - they were still looking for that one thing that brought it all together for them.

Idiocracy.

Nearly 20 years ago, after the Simpson acquittal, legal observers were speculating that jurors watch so many crime shows where the "obvious suspect" is never the guilty party that jurors are conditioned to expect a "twist" in which an unlikely party is revealed to be the culprit.

Add to that the CSI shows and their unrealistic forensic certainty, and maybe there are special challenges for prosecutors dealing with jurors.

(Of course, 50 years ago, prosecutors were cautioning jurors not to expect sudden courtroom confessions a la Perry Mason, so maybe prosecutors just have to adapt as the culture changes.)

 

[wyome]

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 may have been simply a force of habit for some of them. I was on a jury for only 4 days, and I got pretty used to putting my pad on my chair everytime we were ordered out for 10 min. recess, or extended sidebar, or whatever. IMO, it may simply be that it's become second nature to leave their notes on the chair. These people were popping in and out like crazy for the past 6 weeks lol.

 

[krkrjx]

I am becoming convinced that it was the jury making a political statement that failed Caylee...not insufficient evidence.

I wish all states would take the penalty decision out of the jury's hands. DP, LWOP, or whatever the appropriate sentence may be should be determined by the judge based on interpretion of the law. That any jury would acquit a dangerous psychopathic lying baby-killer just because they are against the death penalty is an outrage. To be frank, I am at this moment embarrassed to be an American.

If a person is against the death penalty they should say so during jury selection and when they do say so, it needs to be taken seriously...no trying to persuade them to consider inflicting a penalty that the potential juror has already said they are against! Or...just remove the penalty issue from the jurors' responsiblities altogether and allow them focus on the important task at hand: weighing the evidence and coming to a reasonable consclusion based on that evidence, without concern over what the potential penalty might be.

IMO.

 

[krkrjx]

I saw a documentary on TV about a case where a young man (I think he may have been around 18) shot his grandfather while he slept. The jury sympathized with the kid because the grandfather had been physically and verbally abusing him, his sister, their mother and their grandmother all their lives. The kid finally snapped one night and shot the gf. Then he stole money from his wallet and took off.

The jury convicted him on the least serious charge they could. I do not recall offhand what that was, but it carried a life sentence. However, the jury DID NOT KNOW at the time of deliberations that their verdict could result in a life sentence for this kid. The verdict was because they felt the environment played a major role in the boy's decision to take a life but still they believed he should not go scot free.

After the trial the jurors were horrified to hear the young man had been given a life sentence. They said had they known that was a possibility, they never would have given the guilty verdict that they did.

Like it or not fellow Americans....the potential penalty does come into play during deliberations and IMO it does more often than not.

 

[SarahEcho]

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 may have been simply a force of habit for some of them. I was on a jury for only 4 days, and I got pretty used to putting my pad on my chair everytime we were ordered out for 10 min. recess, or extended sidebar, or whatever. IMO, it may simply be that it's become second nature to leave their notes on the chair. These people were popping in and out like crazy for the past 6 weeks lol.

That's the first thing that popped into my mind when I read the stated objection to the notebooks being left. One accusation after another towards this jury doesn't benefit Caylee nor justice, nothing can bring her back to those that truly loved and cared about her while she was alive.

My memory of Caylee will forever be not one of the joyful little girl singing You Are My Sunshine but that of the mob ready to lynch anyone that suits their need for perverted justice of revenge.

Caylee's memory deserves so much better.

 

[Velouria]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Velouria [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6863672#post6863672"]

[/ame]
red text highlighted by me

I'm sorry, but that's incorrect. These scenarios would constitute Felony Murder in the state of Florida, not Negligent Homicide.

If Casey had accidentally drowned in the pool, it might or might not have been manslaughter, depending on the circumstances, but it wouldn't have been felony murder.

If she had suffocated in the trunk due to heat or duct tape, or was given a lethal dose of chloroform, it would have been felony murder IMO.

If Caylee had been stolen by the babysitter and Casey didn't report it, it would not have been manslaughter or felony murder.

I agree with you AZlawyer, but in my post I was referring only to the two scenarios highlighted in red as indicated at the beginning of my reply to the OP.

 

[Enchanting_eyes]

Sadly, it happens. I was on a jury and when we got into the deliberation room someone said, "He's guilty. Let's stay through lunch then we can get out of here."

While I am sure it happens, there is no proof that it happened with this jury.

 

[Bobbarita]

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

Absolutely!

 

[Duckley]

Respectfully - there was ample evidence. Soprry - IMO the jury failed Caylee.

 

[donnam]

Yea, did you listen to anything the alt juror said? He was pretty much a <modsnip> and was saying things like "They didn't prove motive" when the judge instructs them NOT to consider that and not to weigh that and the state doesn't have to prove motive. YOU think there wasn't enough evidence but most people think there was.

And, juror #3 said they considered punishment, which is not their job. More and more I am thinking this jury had no idea what they were doing!

 

[zadari]

caylee sure as heck didnt duct tape herself or disappear herself or end up triple bagged herself ..the car didnt just didnt decide to have decomp smell inside of it itself .. and anyone with common sense would know if she hadnt done it she wouldnt have sat in prison this long and im sorry kc isnt stupid not at all in fact shes scarey smart.just like ted bundy was ,its almost as if she could be his daughter

 

[SeeTheLight]

Interview with Juror #2 now. Wish they would say what more they needed to reach a different decision.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/anthony-juror-evidence-wasnt-there/1179177

 

[justanother]

Interview with Juror #2 now. Wish they would say what more they needed to reach a different decision.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/anthony-juror-evidence-wasnt-there/1179177

**"I just swear to God ...," he said, his voice falling silent, overcome by tears. "I wish we had more evidence to put her away. I truly do ...

**Juror No. 2 said it was not an easy decision. But in the end, he said, it was the only decision they could make given the evidence presented to them.

**She is "not a good person in my opinion," he said, his voice again overcome by emotion.

**"We truly don't know what happened," Juror No. 2 said. "Somebody knows, but we don't know."

**By lunch Tuesday, the guilty side started to lose votes. Juror No. 2 was the last holdout. The other side's argument was strong, but he was still disappointed. His vote changed. The verdict was read at 2:15 p.m


Please read this article. No matter what you think of this jury, this shows that they did not take this lightly. I feel for these people, what an awful decision to make.

 

[donnam]

I agree completely with the title of this thread. We all know Casey killed her, but in court you have to prove it. Casey doesn't have to prove her innocence, the state has to prove her guilt. They couldn't even prove how Caylee died. They couldn't tie Casey to the body. Its one thing to believe she did it, its another to prove it in a court of law.

I know some of you will never agree, but try to put your feelings aside and look at the evidence. Could you have sent someone to prison for the rest of their life with this evidence. I don't think I could have. All emotions aside, state did not PROVE it. They have the burden of PROOF!

Did Casey do it? Absolutely. Did the state prove she did it? Obviously not. Big difference.

BBM

I respectfully disagree.
1. Duct tape from the home
2. laundry bags from the home
3.T-shirt with the remains seen ONLY in pics with KC, never seen by cindy who did the laundry
4. blanket from the home
5. caylees hair with decomp band in KC's car
6. HUMAN DECOMP SMELL by how many people plus 2 cadaver dogs IN HER CAR.
7. 31 days
8. People do NOT lie if they have nothing to hide.

IMO this jury reached their verdict after Joses opening statement, which they were NOT to consider at all.

 

[Bia.]

**"I just swear to God ...," he said, his voice falling silent, overcome by tears. "I wish we had more evidence to put her away. I truly do ...

**Juror No. 2 said it was not an easy decision. But in the end, he said, it was the only decision they could make given the evidence presented to them.

**She is "not a good person in my opinion," he said, his voice again overcome by emotion.

**"We truly don't know what happened," Juror No. 2 said. "Somebody knows, but we don't know."

**By lunch Tuesday, the guilty side started to lose votes. Juror No. 2 was the last holdout. The other side's argument was strong, but he was still disappointed. His vote changed. The verdict was read at 2:15 p.m


Please read this article. No matter what you think of this jury, this shows that they did not take this lightly. I feel for these people, what an awful decision to make.

I thought JP instructed them NOT to discuss what happened in deliberations? Ugh, I'm too confused with this mess.

 

[lisasalinger]

I just thought of something. I don't watch those CSI shows, but I do know there are WAY too many of them on TV nowadays, and I know a lot of people watch them.

What if that is a problem with the jurors in this case? They've watched far too many of these shows and need that "smoking gun" instead of working to analyze the evidence before them. They were looking for that "AHA" moment that pulled all the pieces together FOR them.

What if people are really becoming that simple, that they need that something shoved in their face that says "this person is 100% guilty" because they can't figure it out on their own. With the mountain of evidence, pointing to Casey - they were still looking for that one thing that brought it all together for them.

Idiocracy.

I totally agree! And the defense shoves down their throat 100 times that there is reasonable doubt and the judge warns them several times about reasonable doubt and then they are given 50 pages of instructions and told to have no emotions... these jurors are terrified by the time they hit the room to actually have an opinion. It has become damn near impossible to convict anybody of crimes these days!! And when they do get convicted, they are released early and go out and commit more crimes.

I'm not saying we should throw every Tom, Dick and Harry in to jail without evidence... I'm saying that we need to use our heads and stop being so fearful and liberal about everything going on in this country. Murderers, rapists and child abusers are roaming free and we know it!

Yes, I still believe that our justice system is a good system but it is not without flaws. How they get fixed, I don't know. But I am definitely pissed about a lot of things these past two days. :banghead:

 

[IRule254]

BTW, I completely agree that the ultimate failure in this case was with the evidence, not with the SA or the jury. I blame Officer Cain for this verdict. If he had paid any attention at all to Kronk in early August 2008, there might have been a lot more forensic evidence.

ITA with every word.

I had a talk with my husband yesterday and he promised me that he would never become an "Officer Cain" no matter how frustrated/tired he was or how unpleasant the the task may seem.

 

[Never4GetCaylee]

Did anyone just see the interview with Juror # 3 on Nightline?????? I'm speechless. She wasn't emotional at all. Basically she said "Oh well. They didn't prove it." and shrugged her shoulders.

 

[lisasalinger]

**"I just swear to God ...," he said, his voice falling silent, overcome by tears. "I wish we had more evidence to put her away. I truly do ...

**Juror No. 2 said it was not an easy decision. But in the end, he said, it was the only decision they could make given the evidence presented to them.

**She is "not a good person in my opinion," he said, his voice again overcome by emotion.

**"We truly don't know what happened," Juror No. 2 said. "Somebody knows, but we don't know."

**By lunch Tuesday, the guilty side started to lose votes. Juror No. 2 was the last holdout. The other side's argument was strong, but he was still disappointed. His vote changed. The verdict was read at 2:15 p.m


Please read this article. No matter what you think of this jury, this shows that they did not take this lightly. I feel for these people, what an awful decision to make.

I definitely don't want to bash the jurors. I have been a juror on a criminal case and I know how difficult it is. People have a vast difference of opinions and it takes time to consider every single person's point of view. My main grievance with them is two things:

1. If they were so passionate about the fact that she probably was not totally innocent and weren't sold on the evidence... then slow down, take the time to go through all of the evidence again, write down notes/graphs/whatever it takes and discuss amongst the group. What was the freaking rush?!!

2. They were negligent to not at least hold her accountable for aggravated child abuse. She admitted to be present when her child died, accident or not, and the child ended up triple bagged with duct tape and decomposed in a swamp. These are facts!! She never called 911 and she lied about it for 3 years. If that's not aggravated child abuse then I am clearly living on the wrong planet.