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

[panthera]

I've been rewatching the opening statements (both sides) and some witness testimony and if I were one of the jurors I would be asking myself how could Casey show such lack of emotion during the days after Caylee "accidentally drowned" yet she sits there in the courtroom dabbing her eyes (as if she's crying, and sometimes looks like she's actually crying) during her attorney's opening statement when hearing about how Caylee died, the alleged molestation, etc. Is it really possible to block out such a tragic event as your child accidentally drowning at the time it happens yet cry about it, and what happened to you years ago, when it's told to the jury in a courtroom? :waitasec:

 

[2goldfish]

3. In her opinion, and also the professional opinion of her friend who is a psychologist, ICA's behavior for those 31 days was "classic" behavior of someone who was sexually abused/traumatized as a child and that her complete and total "blocking" of what happened to Caylee was absolutely appropriate behavior/response from someone with that history.

my snip


your number three there would freak me out too if the DT had had ICA under treatment the last three years and have several psychiatrists/psychologists/whatever on hand as witnesses for the trial, however the ones they did have are no longer witnesses for the DT and are currently on the list for the state. so clearly this isnt an opinion your average specialist might have. which makes me feel MUCH more secure.

I know as a juror, I sure would wonder where all the proof was.

 

[Nehemiah]

I followed the case when it first occurred but haven't kept up. I have been watching the replay of the court proceedings on TV today. I think the defense atty does a good job of planting reasonable doubt. I will be surprised if there is a murder conviction of Casey Anthony. I hate to even say that, but as a "juror" I would not be able to vote for a conviction based on what's been presented thus far.

 

[2goldfish]

- I don't think the prosecution's attempt to show Casey's horribly uncaring behaviour after Caylee disappeared has been fully successful because it's been balanced by witness after witness saying they never saw anything that pointed to Casey being a bad mom. I think the defense strategy of painting Casey as a traumatized abuse victim works for this issue.

my snip


I keep seeing it all over this forum that EVERYONE says ICA was a WONDERFUL mother but it seems no one (appears to be) considering that fact that almost everyone we've heard from rarely, VERY rarely, saw ICA with caylee at all. I dont understand how anyone is reading that of proof of how amazing a parent ICA was when you compare that with what else has come out so far.

mind you I get we're trying to see through a juror's eyes here but I dont think the jurors are so moronic that they didnt hear most of these witnesses say they'd known ICA since mid-may, caylee was murdered in june....this is NOT a lot of time to get to know anyone. even amy & ricardo didnt know her much longer than that.

the sole exception to this may be mallory but even I am unclear on just how often she saw caylee and ICA without anyone else present to know what ICA was like when she had caylee all on her own which by ALL accounts was a rare thing indeed.


sorry, I didnt mean to jump off your post and come off as vicious, I truly dont mean that - its just all this "ICA was wonderful" stuff lights a fire up under my....well, anyways. :floorlaugh: because all we've really seen is that GA & CA were pretty spiffy grandparents.

 

[crimesnooper]

regarding the testimony that ICA was a loving and wonderful mother. Didn't Susan Smith's family and friends say the exact say thing?? and we all know how that turned out!

 

[Soulmagent]

I followed the case when it first occurred but haven't kept up. I have been watching the replay of the court proceedings on TV today. I think the defense atty does a good job of planting reasonable doubt. I will be surprised if there is a murder conviction of Casey Anthony. I hate to even say that, but as a "juror" I would not be able to vote for a conviction based on what's been presented thus far.

So far,but we still ave seven weeks left .

 

[coloradoteacher]

All this talk about ICA being a great mother has got me thinking- sociopaths often see the people in their lives- spuses, children, parents as trophies. Caylee was a cute kid- it would benefit her to act like she was supermom and she was probably proud of her cuteness (see the trial testimony of TL when he talks about Caylee counting to 40 in Spanish) but when it actually came down to being a good mom- choosing her child over a boyfriend i.e. her own happiness, she could not do it. That has been proven through several statements (not sure if in the trial yet) that TL did not want kids esp. girls and was not OK with Caylee hanging out at his place. This is the same with Susan Smith- new boyfriend where kids don't fit.
Just because ICA can keep up appearances doesn't mean she was a good mom.
For me, if the jury sits and hears she was a good mom from JB's prodding and at the same time hears and sees the pictures of her partying, renting movies, laying in bed all day and shopping while her child is missing/dead, ACTIONS will definitely speak louder than words.

 

[Never4GetCaylee]

I just got done watching the JB's OS again and I tried to be as objective as possible....amoung many things, I really wondered what in the world the Roy Kronk thing had to do with anything. He isn't saying RK had anything to do with Caylee's death, so even if everything he said about RK was true...so what? If he found Caylee in some unknown location, I'd be more likely to believe ICA left is somewhere that someone could find it than George.

 

[Soulmagent]

I just got done watching the JB's OS again and I tried to be as objective as possible....amoung many things, I really wondered what in the world the Roy Kronk thing had to do with anything. He isn't saying RK had anything to do with Caylee's death, so even if everything he said about RK was true...so what? If he found Caylee in some unknown location, I'd be more likely to believe ICA left is somewhere that someone could find it than George.

He is trying to discredit evidence as being tampered with ,that is all. He may have something that indicates it was.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

I just got done watching the JB's OS again and I tried to be as objective as possible....amoung many things, I really wondered what in the world the Roy Kronk thing had to do with anything. He isn't saying RK had anything to do with Caylee's death, so even if everything he said about RK was true...so what? If he found Caylee in some unknown location, I'd be more likely to believe ICA left is somewhere that someone could find it than George.

I think all this RK bull was concoted by JB so that he can tell the jury they can't believe anything with respect to the physical evidence retrieved from the scene. Afterall, RK played hide and seek with the body for months...heck, maybe HE put the duct tape there. (insert eyeroll)

 

[janine]

I haven't read this thread but have a question about the Jurors and this seemed like as good a thread as any-

Has Kathy B. or Bill S. (or any other courtroom observer) mentioned anything about the jurors reactions/non-reactions? Are there any reports of tears, shocked looks, boredom, yawning, raised eyebrows, furrowed brows...,etc? I know jurors are supposed to stay neutral and unbiased, but we are humans before anything else and sometimes our emotions take over against our will.

Just wondering if anyone has read or heard anything so far? I bet when we get into the nitty gritty- this might be a better question then.

 

[jandkmom]

I agree with the posters that are talking about the testimonies about ICA being a "good mother". I would have liked for the witnesses to have been asked how many times they had seen ICA vs. how many times ICA was with Caylee. She had no job, paid for no shelter, no clothing, nothing, and Caylee is dead...how is that a good mother???? That makes me so angry for JB to ask the witnesses if she was a good mother.

 

[txsvicki]

It's hard to imagine what a person who never followed the case would be thinking, but they might:

Realize that Casey spoke of Zanny long before Caylee went missing, and it always seemed to be in order to get out of something or do what she wanted , just a lie

Wonder why she lived at home and accepted a vehicle, food, living, etc instead of moving out, working, and getting childcare

Notice that she was confident and always had lots of fun, friends, and activities

Be seeing clearly that the lying always had to do with money and to get out and run around or get her way

Wonder why she took advantage of Tony and drove his car around instead of parking it like he thought

Wonder why she moved in with Tony yet drove home to borrow a shovel, gas cans if so low on gas, and to get food from the freezer.

Realize that she ditched the car after it really began to smell, and are wondering just when that smell showed up.

Beginning to see a pattern of theft after Cindy's testimony.

If they know anything at all about the case they are wondering why she didn't tell at the beginning about the accidental drowning, and if they don't know anything they have to wonder why Baez didn't explain more

 

[1tasha]

I haven't been following this as long as most.

Quite honestly, before the trial started I believed it was an accident or a momentary loss of reason. But as an outsider, I am now wondering what Casey did to necessitate this absolutely mind bending explanation from her DT. The "Good Mother" defense doesn't do much for me. Most of the time when there's a shocking crime like this, the neighbors and friends all are quoted in the paper as being shocked at the actions of this completely normal/friendly person.

 

[crucibelle]

I've been following this case for around 2 years, now, have read most of the discovery, and have thought ICA guilty and deserved of the death penalty.... and JB's statement even gave ME a doubt. So, yes, I can see how someone who has heard nothing/knows nothing could have a reasonable doubt at this point. This is not to say I will have any doubt left in me when the trial is over. I'm waiting to hear all the testimony.

This was my first post in this thread. After listening to the testimony thus far, I am now leaning towards "cold blooded murder", once more. IF (and that's a big "IF") there was an accident in the pool, I don't think it happened at all like JB described it in his opening statement. IF there was an accident, I think it was purely due to ICA's negligence, she KNEW she would be in hot water over it, thus she covered it up -- throwing the body in her trunk and eventually dumping it in the swamp.

 

[Laddsy]

I'm starting to think that she tried the chloroform and it didn't work so she panicked and used the duct tape. Once she started with her plan she had to follow through with it.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

My gut feeling (and it's certainly subject to change), is the ICA put that ladder on the pool and left the gate open. However, I'm not at all convinced that Caylee drowned in that pool. What I am convinced of, from everything I've heard so far in the trial, is that ICA was not a bit upset that Caylee was gone. In fact, my feeling is that, apart from how Caylee's death incovenienced HER, ICA was quite happy that Caylee was gone.

JMO

 

[Quiche]

I think they're getting the picture, today was a real eye opener for them. :yes:

 

[dodie20]

This is an interesting thread and something I've wondered about. Occasionally, I'll see a televised flash of a random trial, or read a little snippet, and see these same types of accusations being made. Not knowing anything about these cases, I usually give the accuser the benefit of the doubt. But when JB brought up this abuse, I was literally floored and kept waiting for some kind of legal backlash. When that didn't happen, (he didn't have to prove it), it made me wonder if this is the norm....and if the family and loved ones involved in these other random trials, are blindsided and floored. This defense has me rethinking my views on the whole judicial system. Is it common for defendants to throw out accusations and blame a named person? MOO.

 

[twocuriouscats]

Hi all,

Just a quick update on where I stand: (I didn't want to go there yesterday - I was worn out so you must have been too).

1) Cindy Anthony's pain was "palpable" thru the TV screen yesterday. She came off as being very credible.

2) I choked up watching Cindy - but Casey did not. I won't forget that she saw her mother in such obvious pain, and failed to react in a compassionate manner.

3) Jose Baez only taught me one thing yesterday...that Casey is SUCH a liar, that I cannot possibly give credibility to anything she might say. NOTHING.

My Mom agrees - yesterday was some day. Casey's in trouble.
My plumber today said she was a sociopath. He doesn't get time to watch this TV stuff. I found myself telling him that I thought she might truly be "evil."

JMHO

PS - I'm trying to be more thoughtful with my posts!

I am truly trying to remian objective. Yesterday was a bad, bad day for the defense.