The Verdict - Do you agree or disagree? #3

[NotRocketSighence]

You are absolutely correct but in this case it sure doesn't mean she was not guilty of anything having to do with her daughter's death.

True. However Casey's right at her trial, as given to her by our legal system is that she is to be cloaked in innocence.

I highly doubt many people did that. She was hung drawn and quartered by the media and everyone else from day 1.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

I don't pick and choose what to believe out of Casey's mouth to support my theories. I prefer to look at the evidence. For me, there was not enough to believe Caylee was murdered, much less by Casey or that Casey disposed of her body.

One must "pick and choose what to believe out of Casey's mouth" because she gave so many conflicting stories. Clearly, the evidence supported none of them. Or did I miss her explanation of the application of the duct tape?

 

[kelian36]

I don't pick and choose what to believe out of Casey's mouth to support my theories. I prefer to look at the evidence. For me, there was not enough to believe Caylee was murdered, much less by Casey or that Casey disposed of her body.

bbm-look at the evidence or ignore the evidence?

Baffles me that anyone using common sense--that knows a 2 year old child was found dead, found behind her residence, found with duct tape wrapped around her head 3 times, found stuffed into 3 trash bags and found in a hamper liner from her home, would say CAYLEE WAS NOT MURDERED? REALLY ?!?!?!?

 

[NotRocketSighence]

..the M.E. couldn't list the exact cause of death-------b/c of what she was "left to work with" by the time the remains had been found-----after the tissues/organs were long gone ( suffocation? drugs?? drowning?? etc.--so much for those tests!) animals had gnawed on the bones and scattered them around...

..fortunately, the duct tape was a poly/cotten blend, even though the cotten had deteriorated, and the tape was in less than stellar condition ( chewed up )-----the poly stood up to the weather/swamp conditions......still sticking to the hair, still evident that IT was what kept the mandible ( that should have fallen OFF/AWAY from the skull once the tissue was no longer there to keep it in place)..

..now why on earth would the body of a small child be in garbage bags in a swamp ----with 3 strips of heavy duty duct tape on the face and stuck to the child's hair ???

..dr.G. explained in great detail @ trial ALL of the factors an M.E. uses in determining c.o.d. etc.--------arriving at her conclusion:

http://www.wesh.com/download/2009/0619/19802034.pdf
--AUTOPSY report-----PAGE 1-----

C.O.D. homicide by undetermined means.

..an accidental drowning----is not a homicide.

Thank you, yes, I watched the trial too. I watched Dr G's testimony. I didn't agree with a couple of her opinion assertions and I found her emotional. Its a highly charged emotional case. Very understandably so. However emotion clouds facts. I am taking all the emotion out of forming my own personal opinions.

I don't make the leap a lot of people do that she was murdered simply because of how and where she was found. Even if she was murdered, I don't find anything making me leap immediately to Casey.

We simply don't know and most likely never will.

 

[kelian36]

No, most of the posters spent 3 years analyzing discovery and came to a GUILTY verdict without any help from the media at all!! Not all thought she was guilty of Murder 1 but thought she should have been convicted of Manslaughter, Child Neglect or Child Abuse that resulted in death.

Personally I believe that cutting four pieces of duct tape screams premeditation and wrapping three pieces of duct tape across a toddlers face (into her hair) is murder.

:gthanks:

 

[kelian36]

Thank you, yes, I watched the trial too. I watched Dr G's testimony. I didn't agree with a couple of her opinion assertions and I found her emotional. Its a highly charged emotional case. Very understandably so. However emotion clouds facts. I am taking all the emotion out of forming my own personal opinions.

I don't make the leap a lot of people do that she was murdered simply because of how and where she was found. Even if she was murdered, I don't find anything making me leap immediately to Casey.

We simply don't know and most likely never will.

Emotion clouds facts....


the jurors IGNORED facts.
What a shame......an (imo) murderer walked,

 

[KALI]

I do not Post Much. I also do not want to get into any verbal arguements.

Here's my take, on this trial.

Simply. It makes me want to throw up. Completely and Totally.

It is my belief, for evermore, that Casey Anthony killed her daughter Caylee.

I do not need to wonder what sickness would make a Mother kill her child-It happens daily.

I am a pretty nice and forgiving person. BUT. When Casey Killed Caylee-I'm over the top.

OH-Not to be FORGOTTEN-Cindy Anthony-The best Damn Mother and Grandmother in the world. I'm going to throw up again.

I'm sorry Caylee.

 

[TexasLori]

Obviously, the media didn't have any bearing on this trial because the media, according to those who blame it, was hugely biased toward Casey being guilty. This jury found her not guilty, so how can anyone say the media played a part in prematurely convicting her?

Given what was put forth at trial, and I'm talking about facts not "what ifs" presented by the defense that had no evidence to back it, there was no other reasonable explanation for what happened to Caylee, other than she was killed by Casey.

You could say that Caylee drowned in the pool on the 16th with George and Casey present, that no one called 911, that George (or someone else) put Caylee in the back of Casey's car, and that Casey drove her car around with the smell for several days. You could say that then Casey abandoned the car, George (or someone else) removed Caylee's body from the car, then disposed of it, and that though Casey knew nothing beyond her drowning in the pool, she lied many times to LE. You could say all that happened, but is it really reasonable to believe that? It would be just as reasonable to say aliens stole Caylee's body.

I have asked this question a few times in the forums, and no one has given me a response yet. If you believe the verdict is correct, what reasonable explanation do you offer that fits with the evidence presented at trial?

 

[kelian36]

I do not Post Much. I also do not want to get into any verbal arguements.

Here's my take, on this trial.

Simply. It makes me want to throw up. Completely and Totally.

It is my belief, for evermore, that Casey Anthony killed her daughter Caylee.

I do not need to wonder what sickness would make a Mother kill her child-It happens daily.

I am a pretty nice and forgiving person. BUT. When Casey Killed Caylee-I'm over the top.

OH-Not to be FORGOTTEN-Cindy Anthony-The best Damn Mother and Grandmother in the world. I'm going to throw up again.

I'm sorry Caylee.

:seeya:
KALI,
I keep thinking the same thing-- I'm sorry Caylee.
I'm sorry her mom walked.
I'm sorry the jury didn't do what I consider a good job.
I'm sorry Caylee will never get justice.

 

[kelian36]

Obviously, the media didn't have any bearing on this trial because the media, according to those who blame it, was hugely biased toward Casey being guilty. This jury found her not guilty, so how can anyone say the media played a part in prematurely convicting her?

Given what was put forth at trial, and I'm talking about facts not "what ifs" presented by the defense that had no evidence to back it, there was no other reasonable explanation for what happened to Caylee, other than she was killed by Casey.

You could say that Caylee drowned in the pool on the 16th with George and Casey present, that no one called 911, that George (or someone else) put Caylee in the back of Casey's car, and that Casey drove her car around with the smell for several days. You could say that then Casey abandoned the car, George (or someone else) removed Caylee's body from the car, then disposed of it, and that though Casey knew nothing beyond her drowning in the pool, she lied many times to LE. You could say all that happened, but is it really reasonable to believe that? It would be just as reasonable to say aliens stole Caylee's body.

I have asked this question a few times in the forums, and no one has given me a response yet. If you believe the verdict is correct, what reasonable explanation do you offer that fits with the evidence presented at trial?

Beautifully put TexasLori. :cheer:

 

[Sustained]

We don't know she was killed, we don't know who did what.

I have a hard time believing that this duct tape was placed over her face yet it survived everything it did, the hurricane, the water, the bones being gnawed on by animals, the bones being scattered around, the duct tape supposedly not being attached to anything but the hair, ie no facial tissue (it was decomposed), Roy Kronk supposedly poking the skull with a stick and lifting it into the air or whatever physical poking around he did and yet we are to believe the skull, the tape, the hair all stayed perfectly in place enough to deduct it was the cause of death. That's too many leaps for me to conclusively make on that evidence alone.

I can theorize a reason or two why an accident is made to look like a crime. I can make enough possible leaps to make things that give me pause and reasonable doubt to not believe absolutely it was Casey.

I simply don't know. None of us do. I just don't jump to the automatic guilty conclusion others do based on what I saw in the trail.

Theories are composed of speculation and speculation leads to speculative doubt, not reasonable doubt. I could speculate as to how Laci Peterson ended up in S.F. Bay ... maybe she went swimming, drowned, washed out to sea, and then washed back to shore with the tides. But when I put all of the circumstantial evidence together against Scott Petersen, my speculation about Laci dying from an accidental drowning becomes just that ... speculation and I, as a juror, would have discarded it as unreasonable doubt.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

True. However Casey's right at her trial, as given to her by our legal system is that she is to be cloaked in innocence.

I highly doubt many people did that. She was hung drawn and quartered by the media and everyone else from day 1.

I disagree. I wanted her to be innocent. Even though it was day 31, not "day1." It was the fact that nothing, absolutely nothing, that came into discovery for almost 3 years later supported any facts that Casey had given as explanation of her daughter's death. Not one single thing. No matter how many times she changed her story. The root cause of lying is self preservation.

I am still in shock that 12 people gathered together and cared so little that they didn't apply themselves to the weighty task set before them. If they saw conflicting facts and evidence it was their duty to ferret out the truth. To this very day, the explanations of those who have chosen to speak for them, have only confirmed that they were working from a distorted premise of the definition of reasonable doubt, the requirements of a guilty verdict and even an improper review of lesser charges.

Casey's jury had her "cloaked in innocence" so totally that they, too, kept themselves cloaked from the good, solid circumstantial evidence. One juror even said she dismissed it all because it was only circumstantial. Logic flew out the window.

All future offenders should be celebrating. It appears that if one sits dumb and mute then a well selected defense jury, lacking a video of the crime, will let that offender go free. After all, everything else is just circumstantial.

It hurts my heart that this comedy of errors may set a new standard that could jeopardize the safety of our children. That is the heart of the matter; not if the tape was only on one side of Caylee's face or not, nor if Casey's reactions were normal or not.

Caylee died. Her mother has given no satisfactory reason that holds up to even the most casual scrutiny. The murderess is identified by her consciousness of guilt. God help the innocent children.

 

[LCoastMom]

Obviously, the media didn't have any bearing on this trial because the media, according to those who blame it, was hugely biased toward Casey being guilty. This jury found her not guilty, so how can anyone say the media played a part in prematurely convicting her?

Given what was put forth at trial, and I'm talking about facts not "what ifs" presented by the defense that had no evidence to back it, there was no other reasonable explanation for what happened to Caylee, other than she was killed by Casey.

You could say that Caylee drowned in the pool on the 16th with George and Casey present, that no one called 911, that George (or someone else) put Caylee in the back of Casey's car, and that Casey drove her car around with the smell for several days. You could say that then Casey abandoned the car, George (or someone else) removed Caylee's body from the car, then disposed of it, and that though Casey knew nothing beyond her drowning in the pool, she lied many times to LE. You could say all that happened, but is it really reasonable to believe that? It would be just as reasonable to say aliens stole Caylee's body.

I have asked this question a few times in the forums, and no one has given me a response yet. If you believe the verdict is correct, what reasonable explanation do you offer that fits with the evidence presented at trial?

Thank you!

Re BBM - I have asked this question a couple times since the verdict and no one has answered it. Many who agree with the verdict claim we want to convict based on emotion, regardless of the amount of time spent analyzing EVERYTHING.

While I agree this is a highly emotional case (as are all children's deaths), IMO LE did a tremendous job, especially considering they were 31 days behind at the time of the 911 call and the lack of cooperation from the victim's own family. LE had a lot to overcome, yet they managed to connect the dots and found no one else with means, motive and opportunity.

Since none of us (to my knowledge) knew CFCA, GA, CA, LA or their cohorts prior to Day 31, what exactly would we have to gain by wanting to find any of them guilty of this heinous crime, if the evidence pointed elsewhere? That IMO makes no sense.

 

[NotRocketSighence]

I disagree. I wanted her to be innocent. Even though it was day 31, not "day1."

"Since day 1" is a common saying. Nothing to do with the fact this case was based 31 days.

 

[ExpectingUnicorns]

"Since day 1" is a common saying. Nothing to do with the fact this case was based 31 days.

I do know that.

 

[mimmy03]

ARe you kidding me? It is so evident that most posters on this forum bought into the mdeia hype that Convicted before trial ever started. JMO

Right before the trial started I wasn't 100% convinced either way. But after looking at all the evidence (didn't watch the news much about it b/c the talking heads annoy me) I came to the conclusion that she was guilty. Because any other scenario makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Exactly how Caylee died is unknown, but there is no doubt in my mind KC is responsible for Caylee's death. At the very least the jury should have found her guilty of manslaughter.

 

[Baznme]

So, in Caseyspeak, 31st day = Day 1. Day 1 is the day a lot of websleuthers started picking this apart to see what was at the bottom.

 

[Baznme]

Thank you, yes, I watched the trial too. I watched Dr G's testimony. I didn't agree with a couple of her opinion assertions and I found her emotional. Its a highly charged emotional case. Very understandably so. However emotion clouds facts. I am taking all the emotion out of forming my own personal opinions.

I don't make the leap a lot of people do that she was murdered simply because of how and where she was found. Even if she was murdered, I don't find anything making me leap immediately to Casey.

We simply don't know and most likely never will.

Emotion didn't apply all that duct tape to Caylee's skull. If you don't believe she was murdered by KC or whoever, why would that tape be there?

Dr. G got emotional because the DT was trying to make a fool out of her and she got mad. I don't blame her. She finally came back with the statement "no child should have duct tape on their face". She determined it was a "homicide" because of it so how can you dispute that? What is your level of expertise that gives you the idea that her determination is questionnable?

No, scratch that........it doesn't even matter. What reason would Caylee have had that duct tape on her face or anywhere on her skull?

 

[kelian36]

Theories are composed of speculation and speculation leads to speculative doubt, not reasonable doubt. I could speculate as to how Laci Peterson ended up in S.F. Bay ... maybe she went swimming, drowned, washed out to sea, and then washed back to shore with the tides. But when I put all of the circumstantial evidence together against Scott Petersen, my speculation about Laci dying from an accidental drowning becomes just that ... speculation and I, as a juror, would have discarded it as unreasonable doubt.

:applause:

 

[Baznme]

ARe you kidding me? It is so evident that most posters on this forum bought into the mdeia hype that Convicted before trial ever started. JMO

Do you not realize that a lot of the media come here to find out what is truth, theory and/or fantasy? There's a lot of information right here in these archives that some of the media knows nothing about and there are archived posts of some of the key characters in the background of this case.

There are awesome sleuthers here that know how to find reliable sources to back up what is found and the information is scrutinized by all. You can't just post a link to anything you find on the net and expect it to be an acceptable resource. I don't need to tell you that if you've been around here long enough, so your statement that "most posters on this forum bought into the media hype that convicted before trial" ever started is completely unfair and false. It's actually an insult.