The Verdict - Do you agree or disagree? #3

[KarmaGet'em]

The point is that she states that even Casey doesn't know what happened after the drowning. She doesn't know how Caylee got in the woods, etc. Whether the reason she doesn't know is she wasn't there for the disposal or she blacked out or had some kind of mental break, we don't know. AF doesn't say.

BBM - you left out the option that Casey just lied about not knowing what happened after the drowning.

 

[pcrum12]

Thank you. I read that. But I'm looking for confirmation that ALL of the evidence was in the jury room as the OP stated - since he/she is such a stickler for every little detail.

I believe someone stated on here today that all the exhibits were in the courtroom while the verdit was read. I simply posted proof that was not true and added further information that 400 peices of evidence was sent to the jury room. Someone then posted that any audio video would have to be requested in which I agree, as it is also noted in the links I provided.

 

[natsound]

I understand where you're coming from. But, we just don't know. Maybe (pure speculation) she was traumatized after finding Caylee drowned and just doesn't know what happened next.

KC does know what happened. No drowning. Her lawyers aren't going to concede that! They have to say she doesn't know.

 

[IfIMay]

Well, I am pretty sure they talked about Caseys prior bad acts of sometimes smoking pot, so I think they could have have asked Cindy about it, how would it make sense she could be asked about her kids maybe having relations but they couldnt ask her about money and a fight? A fight that happened right before the child disappears, but then the State argues she killed to party?

And exactly what would she say? The rules of evidence apply, whether some would like a dot to dot connect sheet or not. Amy testified that FCA told her Cindy was crazy. Apparently FCA's word was gold to the jury, so what would change? You want this and that, but the evidence that can be admitted is what it is. If you study it, then answer is as plain as the moles on FCA's face.

 

[KarmaGet'em]

Sure. http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/video?id=8232571

at around 6:34 you will see that all the exhibits and evidence is not in the courtroom. I have also posted here a page or two back links to news sources stating that 400 exhibits were sent to the jury room.

Keep in mind that a large number of the pieces of evidence were displayed on their monitor from a computer database (ie. videos, some of the photos, etc.). It was said in those past links that the jury would have to request to view those because they did not have access to that in the jury room. No such request at the point that the article was written.

Also, review of the witness testimony would require a request to the judge so that the court reporter could transcribe the testimony to them.

 

[Sustained]

Sure. http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/video?id=8232571

at around 6:34 you will see that all the exhibits and evidence is not in the courtroom. I have also posted here a page or two back links to news sources stating that 400 exhibits were sent to the jury room.

None of the trial testimony was in the jury room. They would have had to ask the court reporter to read the desired testimony back. What good are the exhibits w/o the actual testimony ?

 

[Chablis]

And exactly what would she say? The rules of evidence apply, whether some would like a dot to dot connect sheet or not. Amy testified that FCA told her Cindy was crazy. Apparently FCA's word was gold to the jury, so what would change? You want this and that, but the evidence that can be admitted is what it is. If you study it, then answer is as plain as the moles on FCA's face.

If the State wanted to use the fight as a motive, all they had to do was go talk to the grandparents and a case could have been made around Cindy confronting Casey, if they tried to say she did it to party, they could have went with the fight thing and its a travesty they did not, this happened the day before Caylee was last seen and one chloroform search was done months ago, I cant believe the State went with the chloroform party thing.

 

[coco puff]

I understand where you're coming from. But, we just don't know. Maybe (pure speculation) she was traumatized after finding Caylee drowned and just doesn't know what happened next.

well at least she was able to remember she had a date that night. Wouldn't want to keep TonE waiting.

I just feel like crying all over again. :truce:

Coco Puff out.

 

[pcrum12]

It's all in your interpretation of the definition, I guess. I have a friend of the family that drove drunk one night with 2 friends in the car. They hit a telephone pole and one of the passengers was killed. The driver, (who was over the allowed level for alcohol in his system) was given 6 years in jail for aggravated manslaughter. It was an accident but due to negligence.

If you have a pool and a 2.5 yr. old. You're on the computer or you've fallen asleep and you didn't check to make sure the doors were locked and the child was inside with you before you went on with whatever you wanted to do, then yes, you are negligent because you didn't take all precautions to ensure the safety of your child.

It would be the same if they were in the backyard already and she got on the phone, not paying attention to what the baby was doing and Caylee climbed that ladder and she drowned. YOU can be held responsible because you did not ensure the safety of your child.

She could have been held legally responsible. Lots of families that have lost children this way were not prosecuted and the drowning deemed "accidental". If this is "culpable negligence" and if Florida courts were to exercise the law as it is written, there would be a lot more people to face the charges. Many don't get to the courts and are written up in police reports as an "accident".

That being said, I don't believe that's what happened here. Too many of FCA's activities in March that indicate to me this was planned, far in advance and so the point of the alleged "accidental" drowning is moot IMHO.

accident vs culpable negligence. The way I interpret it is driving drunk and having an accident that ends with a death is culpable for driving drunk is a crime, driving drunk is gross and flagrant, it's conduct showing reckless disregard of human life, or of the safety of persons exposed to its dangerous effects. If Caylee drowned while Casey was say drunk or on drugs, or left her home alone, that would be culpable negligence. I just can't jump that while she was sleeping or on the computer, especially considering another adult was there that admitted to this normal day of him watching, feeding, sharing a video with her, is culpable negligence. MOO.

 

[dvdman]

I watched the "48 hours on ID Discovery" special last night about the case and all I can say again is WOW! How in the world did that Jury ever let this murderer off has got to be up there with the other "Unexplained Mysteries Of The World". Anyway I still disagree 100% with the verdict and I think the Jury should have been drug tested. I mean that's the only explanation I could think of for their verdict.

 

[Sustained]

If the State wanted to use the fight as a motive, all they had to do was go talk to the grandparents and a case could have been made around Cindy confronting Casey, if they tried to say she did it to party, they could have went with the fight thing and its a travesty they did not, this happened the day before Caylee was last seen and one chloroform search was done months ago, I cant believe the State went with the chloroform party thing.

And what makes you think the grandparents would have testified against FCA, especially since they CA's parents ?

 

[Baznme]

accident vs culpable negligence. The way I interpret it is driving drunk and having an accident that ends with a death is culpable for driving drunk is a crime, driving drunk is gross and flagrant, it's conduct showing reckless disregard of human life, or of the safety of persons exposed to its dangerous effects. If Caylee drowned while Casey was say drunk or on drugs, or left her home alone, that would be culpable negligence. I just can't jump that while she was sleeping or on the computer, especially considering another adult was there that admitted to this normal day of him watching, feeding, sharing a video with her, is culpable negligence. MOO.

We're talking about two different times of day. FCA admitted she left the house that afternoon with Caylee and according to the phone pings she went back to the house AFTER GA went to work. After nanny's non-existence is discovered, she changed her story. As far as the "accident" vs. culpable negligence. Replace the alcohol with the computer, cell phone and voila you have the addiction.

I'm with logicalgirl. Done with this thread. It's counter-productive and I'm sure there's another case awaiting some sleuthing.

 

[SailorMoon]

Welcome to the Pinellas County 12 --- the 8th wonder of the world.

 

[MissJames]

Hmm - 24 hours in the heat in Florida - doubt by that time the duct tape would have stuck....

I agree.I not only believe Casey put the duct tape over Caylee's mouth while she was alive,I think she did it with Caylee's eyes looking right at her.

At the hearing when JA described what the State believed happened to Caylee,Casey grabbed her wrists and rubbed them .


I've said it before , but as a foster mother for 17 years I've seen what so-called loving mothers are capable of doing to their babies. Just like an abusive husband might blame the wife he beats for making him do it, mothers (and fathers) justify abusing their children the same way. The sickest are the ones who behave like the model parent in public ,because they know their abuse is unacceptable,so they find ways to torture their child in ways that won't show.
There is something called nanny's elbow.The joint can be displaced causing excruciating pain ,and can be popped back in . It's one of the hideous tricks to hide child abuse because it doesn't show.Left unchecked,the abuse gets worse over time.
There is not a doubt in my mind Casey is like that ,and worse. Guilty Felony One .

 

[MissJames]

Could explain why so much duct tape and how it was attached though. Please don't get hung up on a detail such as what I suggested regarding the duct tape. I wanted to bring up the "rubbing alcohol" as a possibility as everyone has it in their home and it's a cheap chemical to access and evaporates completely. Right down her lane, KWIM?

Didn't CA say she googled alcohol?

 

[Aedrys]

Saying "well, we will just never know" is not good enough for what happened to Caylee. It wouldn't be good enough if someone murdered my stepchild. I would be horrified if the murderer of my child got off because of such an attitude. If I were juror, that wouldn't be good enough to me. I would use every last bit of my logic and imagination along with looking at every last piece of evidence and testimony to help me make a decision. Every murdered child deserves for twelve people to sit down and fill in the missing pieces, not say "well, we'll just never know" and acquit a murderer. That's not how justice is supposed to work. That's a failure of justice to just be okay with never knowing what really happened and that's that, go ahead and acquit. I can't believe anyone would be okay with that. Surely if it was someone's own child, I would think that giving up at not knowing would NEVER be good enough. Some of those twelve had children, and startlingly, not knowing was good enough. Since did the world become so complacent like this? So unwilling to use imagination and logic to put the puzzle pieces together and see the truth that is staring them in the face? Are we so self centered and insecure with ourselves and the world we live in that it's better we think of Casey as a good mom and we'll just never know what really happened to Caylee? That's not good enough at all to me. This verdict is wrong and a travesty of justice.

 

[Baznme]

Didn't CA say she googled alcohol?

Yep,.........here's what was transcribed from that day's testimony.

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6746944&postcount=73"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Cindy Anthony's testimonies[/ame]

and another transcribed for that day by another Websleuther.

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6746726&postcount=74"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Cindy Anthony's testimonies[/ame]

 

[Chablis]

And what makes you think the grandparents would have testified against FCA, especially since they CA's parents ?

So the very last day the child was seen and the events just dont matter? Her parents testified for the State, people can be subpoenaed.

 

[MissJames]

Yep,.........here's what was transcribed from that day's testimony.

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Cindy Anthony's testimonies

and another transcribed for that day by another Websleuther.

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Cindy Anthony's testimonies

Thanks,Baznme :seeya:

Poor Caylee. She didn't stand a chance : (

 

[RR0004]

Ok, but what about the money she stole from her grandfather? Do you really think they could not get that and show that and then ask Cindy if she approached Casey, because they asked Cindy all sorts of stuff, even insinuating incest between her kids. The State could have presented this, the last few hours the child was alive, and things maybe could have been different.

jmo

I think it has to do with introducing prior bad acts and all that stuff...like the check/ID fraud...not admissible.