Through a Juror's Eyes/What do those who haven't followed the case believe? (Merged)

[Mariah]

I followed this case fairly closely when the news first came out about Caylee missing. I followed it until Caylee's remains were found and just paid passing interest to it until the beginning of testimony in the trial. Thus, I was not familiar with the evidence released over that time. Based on the evidence I've seen in the state's case I believe Casey is guilty. I also think the defense's explanation of events does more (at this point, before they present their evidence) to push me toward guilt than innocence. It's just too far fetched IMO. However, for whatever reason I'm hung up on the chloroform. We know Casey visited a site on making chloroform 84 times and we know evidence of chloroform was found in the trunk. But how did she get/make the chloroform? How hard is it either buy or make it? Is there any evidence whatsoever she purchased or had access to the ingredients she would need? Is there any evidence she bought, borrowed or stole any chloroform? If the state could present any evidence along those lines it would be a slam dunk for me.

IMO, I agree.

Several people I know who don't follow the case were convinced of guilt after the defense opening statement. Its science fiction.

 

[TeaBird]

I am trying to wrap my head around this all morning. I have thought ICA was guilty from the first time I saw her and her facial expression/body language combined with circumstances just seemed wrong.

So far the DT has issued 1. accidental drowning, 2. help from GA, and 3. abuse. I don't believe any of these have been substantiated (not even #1 with the duct tape).

However, it seems that the prosecutors points have been 1. ICA lies and 2. information on decomp/recovery site. Where are they proving that ICA murdered her kid?

Perhaps I am missing some arguments since I am only partially listening to this while I am at work and reading summary articles. Maybe someone can shed some light?

I'm not sure if answering you is allowed on this thread. So I'll just quickly say, the DT placed ICA at the time and place of her death, but she never called 911, never accounted for the duct tape over her mouth and nose, never told anyone she was dead for 31 days but danced, partied and loved often,
never told the truth about Caylee's absence, got rid of the body like garbage showing consciousness of guilt, never showed emotion until she went into court before a jury. Googled how to make chloroform 84 times, neck breaking etc, before the death of Caylee. Inside the car chloroform was found 10,000 times the amount it should have been with decomposition and Caylees Dna in HER car.

 

[GeekyGirl]

I'm not sure if answering you is allowed on this thread. So I'll just quickly say, the DT placed ICA at the time and place of her death, but she never called 911, never accounted for the duct tape over her mouth and nose, never told anyone she was dead for 31 days but danced, partied and loved often,
never told the truth about Caylee's absence, got rid of the body like garbage showing consciousness of guilt, never showed emotion until she went into court before a jury. Googled how to make chloroform 84 times, neck breaking etc, before the death of Caylee. Inside the car chloroform was found 10,000 times the amount it should have been with decomposition and Caylees Dna in HER car.

No disrespect meant, but did I miss where they definitively established the actual time and place of Caylee's death? As a newbie to this case, my biggest problem is that the prosecution doesn't seem to have an actual theory of how the homicide occurred. Lots of evidence about the disposal of the body, which certainly doesn't look good, but I haven't heard anything that would convince me, beyond a reasonable doubt, that ICA had a plan or even that she was the only person with access to Caylee during the window of opportunity. Again, my gut tells me she's responsible, but that's not the same as believing the pros. has proven it's case.

 

[sumbunny]

No disrespect meant, but did I miss where they definitively established the actual time and place of Caylee's death?[/B] As a newbie to this case, my biggest problem is that the prosecution doesn't seem to have an actual theory of how the homicide occurred. Lots of evidence about the disposal of the body, which certainly doesn't look good, but I haven't heard anything that would convince me, beyond a reasonable doubt, that ICA had a plan or even that she was the only person with access to Caylee during the window of opportunity. Again, my gut tells me she's responsible, but that's not the same as believing the pros. has proven it's case.

BBM-

The defense admits to Caylee's death on June 16th. I believe the SA agrees to that date as well. I also believe the defense agrees her death was at home.

The prosecution seems to think the duct tape and or 84 hits on how to make chloroform was the murder weapon.

Moo HTH

 

[GeekyGirl]

BBM-

The defense admits to Caylee's death on June 16th. I believe the SA agrees to that date as well. I also believe the defense agrees her death was at home.

The prosecution seems to think the duct tape and or 84 hits on how to make chloroform was the murder weapon.

Moo HTH

Thanks for the info on the date of date, I missed that somehow. As I said, I can see where they've made a strong case for culpability, just not intent or premeditation. It's the "or" that bothers me. Duct tape alone would make me question premeditation, and the chloroform angle would leave room for doubt as to her intent (sedation vs. murder). Not saying they aren't valid theories, just probably not enough, for me, to vote for a verdict of first degree murder. MOO

Off topic, it's refreshing to find such intelligent, thoughtful people to discuss this with.

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

 

[IfIMay]

Premeditation can be formed in the amount of time it takes to cut 3 pieces of duct tape and place them one by one over the mouth and nose of a child. It does not require a detailed plan weeks or months in advance. Just sayin'...

 

[Kat]

I was shocked last Saturday when my husband told me that my mother-in-law (his mother) knew absolutely nothing about Casey Anthony. She is in her mid 60's, quite active, and lives in Houston. She had no clue who she was or what she had done. I was really surprised, but I guess there must be more than a few out there like her. I just thought it was weird.

Up until the trial started most people I come into contact with on a daily basis have no clue who she is and if they have they don't remember why she was arrested and if they do remember they ask isn't she in prison yet.

Now a great deal more do mention her but only in passing and very briefly.

Just my experience.

 

[Kat]

Premeditation can be formed in the amount of time it takes to cut 3 pieces of duct tape and place them one by one over the mouth and nose of a child. It does not require a detailed plan weeks or months in advance. Just sayin'...

I agree. And will even go to say it could have been even less time. Premeditation is not deliberation.

 

[IfIMay]

I agree. And will even go to say it could have been even less time. Premeditation is not deliberation.

If a gun had been used as the weapon, it would be in the instant it takes to point and shoot.

People seem to get caught up on points that are not elements of the crime to be proven, too.

I pray that once the Judge reads the LAW and the instructions that follow, it will be clear what elements must be proven and what will be conjecture to the day we all die.

 

[GeekyGirl]

Premeditation can be formed in the amount of time it takes to cut 3 pieces of duct tape and place them one by one over the mouth and nose of a child. It does not require a detailed plan weeks or months in advance. Just sayin'...

Very true But again, to me, it's the "chloroform or duct tape or both"... Pick one, and argue the elements of the crime based on that theory. It's when they start saying "look at the duct tape, that could have killed her, but hey if you think the duct tape was applied after her death but before her body start to decompose then here's another alternative, chloroform" that I have problems, because each scenario meets the element of the crime in different ways. The truth is, I don't think anyone besides Casey and maybe a few other people actually know how this young girl died, so proving things like intent and premeditation become next to impossible. Speculating on them is a different story, but that's totally different from proving someone's guilt in a court of law. Again, I'm not trying to Casey's side, I truly believe what happened to that young girl was an atrocity beyond compare, but that isn't the same as believing that the prosecution has met their burden of proof. I know that probably sounds cold, and I apologize for that.

 

[tamild]

Just chiming in that I too had no knowledge of this case. My friend was over one day and asked me if I was following the jury selection for Casey Anthony, and I said "who?" The name sounded a little familiar to me, but I had no idea who she was or what she was accused of. I was blown away to find the out that the Anthonys are from Warren, OH, because that's where I live as well. I don't subscribe to the newspaper and back in 2008 I was working from home roughly 60 hrs. per week. Anyway, my friend told me that this was a huge case and that I should watch, so that's what I've been doing. After watching the trial for a bit, I was curious as to whether anyone else thought the defense team was as terrible as I found them to be, and a Google search brought me to this forum.

By the way, I didn't know who Scott Peterson was either until I saw the name referenced in this thread and looked him up.

 

[cluciano63]

Lol, I feel almost like if everyone does not agree that it has been shown that Casey killed Caylee intentionally and with an evil glint in her eye as she did it, that the opinion isn't really welcome.

I do think Casey and Casey alone is responsible, but I still have no idea how she died, exactly when she died, why she died or if anyone else knew she died very soon afterward and was complicit after the fact.

 

[citigirl]

I am thinking that the prosecution is going to have Casey's jailmates provide the specifics of how Casey allegedly murdered Caylee.

Since I just started watching during this trial, can anyone tell me if the jailmates all tell the same story and if any of them have seemed believable when they have testified before?

 

[SevenSeas]

My 79 yr. old Catholic, "Right to Life" mother hasn't followed the case until now and she said last night...give her the needle! I was totally shocked. lol

 

[whiteangora]

BBM

I believe some people are just born evil and KC is one of them.

I agree. And, for anyone who thinks she was a good mother, when was the last time you had sex in front of a 2 and a half year old child in your bed? Casey was only a good mother when it was to impress people. I shudder to think what she was like when her and Caylee were alone.

 

[goldenlover]

Lol, I feel almost like if everyone does not agree that it has been shown that Casey killed Caylee intentionally and with an evil glint in her eye as she did it, that the opinion isn't really welcome.

I do think Casey and Casey alone is responsible, but I still have no idea how she died, exactly when she died, why she died or if anyone else knew she died very soon afterward and was complicit after the fact.

I agree with everything you said. I also feel like giving my opinion on here is not welcomed and I am going to be "removed" from this forum, but I am respectfully disagreeing with the majority here, it is only my opinion, and I think it is necessary so we can all see that different people hear and interpret the same testimony differently. that is what will happen with the jury also.
That is why I do not feel this is a slam dunk case. I also do not feel the SA has proven the 1st degree murder charge beyond a reasonable doubt. I do believe they have more than proven the charges about giving false info. to the police, but that is about it.

 

[Chablis]

I agree with everything you said. I also feel like giving my opinion on here is not welcomed and I am going to be "removed" from this forum, but I am respectfully disagreeing with the majority here, it is only my opinion, and I think it is necessary so we can all see that different people hear and interpret the same testimony differently. that is what will happen with the jury also.
That is why I do not feel this is a slam dunk case. I also do not feel the SA has proven the 1st degree murder charge beyond a reasonable doubt. I do believe they have more than proven the charges about giving false info. to the police, but that is about it.

The media has convicted her for years, thanks to Nancy Grace. I really find it very interesting that this case is so high profile. Parents kill their kids everyday, but Casey was lucky to be the featured one, shes more evil than Shainya Davis' mom, who actually gave her daughter to men to rape for her debt, and they killed her, tossed her body, and the mother got out of jail. I didn't see a huge protest about that, to me thats just terrible, but for the past years Nancy has been exploiting the expensive bottled water that Casey was buying, acting like she contacted Evian directly, these are waters on a jail commisary, I mean what is the big deal? Its been stuff like this I just dont get.

Casey is a weird girl, there is probably something mentally wrong with her, but nothing here points to intentional murder, I don't think the State has proved it at all. It is possible for people to react badly and do something outrageous to coverup stuff, especially a person who denied a pregnancy and stuff like that. I do think a pattern has been shown to establish she does not handle things well.

jmo

 

[erinleigh]

Although I have followed the case I have not followed much of the Roy Krunk part. So as someone who has no knowledge of this portion of the case except the August?December part here are my thoughts.
Roy probably thought the wooded area would be a good place to start in searching for a body. Some people to like to immerse themselves in a high profile case. I believe he saw something that indicated to him that it could possibly be Caylee. He called 911. Nothing was found by police. He probably just let it go but somewhere in his mind was the niggling feeling he was correct in what he saw. Time passed. He drove by the site again in December thinkng "im going to look again, I know what I saw" He goes to look again (the pretense of relieveing himself was just so he qouldn't look suspicious) He went back into the woods, saw something again that very much looked suspicious and called 911 again. I believe he may even have stated to his son he knew where the body was because he knew what he saw in August. Im sure when the police in August didnt confirm his findings he let ot go for the time being.
Any statements he may have made could simply be that he didnt want to be implicated somehow because he found the body. Its possible he really just felt it was there and wanted Caylee found. i dont care if he wanted $ or fame. It's irrelevent to me. No way can anyone convince me even with my limited knowledge that he had anything to do with the disposal, moving or mirder of Caylee.

 

[goldenlover]

The media has convicted her for years, thanks to Nancy Grace. I really find it very interesting that this case is so high profile. Parents kill their kids everyday, but Casey was lucky to be the featured one, shes more evil than Shainya Davis' mom, who actually gave her daughter to men to rape for her debt, and they killed her, tossed her body, and the mother got out of jail. I didn't see a huge protest about that, to me thats just terrible, but for the past years Nancy has been exploiting the expensive bottled water that Casey was buying, acting like she contacted Evian directly, these are waters on a jail commisary, I mean what is the big deal? Its been stuff like this I just dont get.

Casey is a weird girl, there is probably something mentally wrong with her, but nothing here points to intentional murder, I don't think the State has proved it at all. It is possible for people to react badly and do something outrageous to coverup stuff, especially a person who denied a pregnancy and stuff like that. I do think a pattern has been shown to establish she does not handle things well.

jmo

I think those that have followed the media case have convicted her and many are not looking objectively at ONLY the evidence presented at trial. They are hearing it and interpreting it the way they want to. They are condemming JB for all his objections and motions, etc. The SA also has many objections. If they are so sure of their slam dunk case why keep objecting to JB's questioning of their witnesses? What are they afraid their own witnesses will say? He is only doing his job. I also am in the minority here thinking that he has done a pretty decent job discrediting some of the states witness testimony. In my eyes he has at least. Yes, Casey is a liar and this is a bizarre case..that we can all agree on, but what really happened? None of us know and neither does the prosecution or the Medical Examiner. I don't see how anyone could recommend a death sentence for so many unknowns or by Nancy Grace's bombshells.

 

[GeekyGirl]

I agree with everything you said. I also feel like giving my opinion on here is not welcomed and I am going to be "removed" from this forum, but I am respectfully disagreeing with the majority here, it is only my opinion, and I think it is necessary so we can all see that different people hear and interpret the same testimony differently. that is what will happen with the jury also.
That is why I do not feel this is a slam dunk case. I also do not feel the SA has proven the 1st degree murder charge beyond a reasonable doubt. I do believe they have more than proven the charges about giving false info. to the police, but that is about it.

I concur that we're definitely in the minority here, Golden, but I haven't felt unwelcome. This is such an provocative case, emotionally, that I don't take it personally when people disagree with me. Unless of course, they make it personal, but so far I've found that not to be the case. ITA that it's quite possible that one, if not more, of the jurors might have the same reservations we do, especially with the weight of the DP on the case. Personally I would go as far as to say that the SA has made a reasonable case for Casey's culpability in the death, but I'm still on the fence regarding the charge of murder.