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

[Reality Orlando]

I follow a few live trial cases and prefer live feed cases vs. talking head media so I can draw my own opinions as a case progresses. I have particularly avoided this case, as I did anything about the Phil Specter Case, so I could build my opinion based on what the jury heard and that only.

Day one of this trial, I proudly listened to the State Opening thinking... yeah, she'll get the needle for sure! Then... here came the defenses opening, and I was stunned with the concept that the story could actually have legs... that is, reasonable doubt might not be hard to find. Or as Jose Baez put it "Reasonable Doubt isn't sprinkled throughout this case, It lives here."

As I listened intently for a clear how/when/where/why/who about Caylee's "murder", it never arrived. Even with all the circumstantial evidence provided, the State, IMO (which I'm certain is not popular) failed to meet the burden of proof. Now one day into the defense, and reasonable doubt isn't just here and there, it's starting to grow all over.

Sorry for being the "odd out" here, but I'm just calling it as if I were a juror, and yes, I could have been an unbiased juror in this case... in fact when it started, I would have probably been picked by the State.

I don't think it's a slam dunk. Everyone at my husband's company think it was an accident and she was too terrified of her mother to admit to it. They don't feel the duct tape evidence proved it was around her face or that it killed her. I have to wonder how many on the jury may see it the same way.

 

[goldenlover]

I follow a few live trial cases and prefer live feed cases vs. talking head media so I can draw my own opinions as a case progresses. I have particularly avoided this case, as I did anything about the Phil Specter Case, so I could build my opinion based on what the jury heard and that only.

Day one of this trial, I proudly listened to the State Opening thinking... yeah, she'll get the needle for sure! Then... here came the defenses opening, and I was stunned with the concept that the story could actually have legs... that is, reasonable doubt might not be hard to find. Or as Jose Baez put it "Reasonable Doubt isn't sprinkled throughout this case, It lives here."

As I listened intently for a clear how/when/where/why/who about Caylee's "murder", it never arrived. Even with all the circumstantial evidence provided, the State, IMO (which I'm certain is not popular) failed to meet the burden of proof. Now one day into the defense, and reasonable doubt isn't just here and there, it's starting to grow all over.

Sorry for being the "odd out" here, but I'm just calling it as if I were a juror, and yes, I could have been an unbiased juror in this case... in fact when it started, I would have probably been picked by the State.

I am right there with you. I have been following the case quite a bit from the very beginning. I thought for sure Casey was guilty. After hearing Baez's opening statements and the States case my entire opinion has changed. I also think Jose Baez is doing a pretty good job knocking down the states case. I did not think the testimony today was boring and I thought some very good points were made by the defense.

Even if it is Casey Anthony, I am shocked to think that someome could receive the DP with so little credible evidence.

 

[GeekyGirl]

(snipped)

Even if it is Casey Anthony, I am shocked to think that someome could receive the DP with so little credible evidence.

This. It's not that I don't think she's responsible for her daughter's death, I do, but I'm worried the she'll be given the DP because of the emotional nature of the case rather than the actual evidence. The idea of that scares more than a little bit. The DP has it's place, but it shouldn't be used as a tool for what amounts to state sanctioned lynching. MOO

 

[goldenlover]

I'd find an alternate...if everyone else is in opposition of what we may perceive her opinion to be...Well...that is the route it might go...if it is true that she "can't judge" and is "taking notes" during the Defense case (not the prosecution) so that she can back herself up during jury deliberations. All indications I have read point that the jury (mostly save one or two) is largely with the prosecution. If it comes down to one obstinate juror...that is what the alternates are for. If they refuse to deliberate.

Are they allowed to do that? I am not sure about that. I think that would result in a hung jury, they cannot just kick her out and ask for an alternate becaue she does not agree with the rest of them. If she thinks not guilty and refuses to change her mind it would just be a hung jury. The alternates are there in case a juror gets sick or has some type of family or other emergency during the duration of the trial and has to leave.

 

[krkrjx]

I don't think it's a slam dunk. Everyone at my husband's company think it was an accident and she was too terrified of her mother to admit to it. They don't feel the duct tape evidence proved it was around her face or that it killed her. I have to wonder how many on the jury may see it the same way.

Are those at your husband's company ignoring the 31 days? I think it could easily be seen as an accident and KC was afraid to tell her parents if not for...

...Duct tape on the face of the child who had been thrown out like garbage. Immediately following the *fatal accident*, the child's mother went out and partied hearty for 31 days, and the party only ended then because a distraught grandmother intervened looking for her granddaughter. Then...after being arrested and charged with the child's murder, the mother sits in jail for three years! before claiming the death was an accident.

I try not to think of any case as a slam dunk because it is true that you never know what a jury is going to do, but Good old fashioned Common Sense says Caylee's death was no accident!

Plus, I see nothing that points to KC being afraid of her parents.

 

[goldenlover]

I don't think it's a slam dunk. Everyone at my husband's company think it was an accident and she was too terrified of her mother to admit to it. They don't feel the duct tape evidence proved it was around her face or that it killed her. I have to wonder how many on the jury may see it the same way.

I don't think they proved the duct tape was around her face or that it killed her either. I think Dr. Spitz, the ME from Michigan who did the second autopsy is going to poke more holes in the duct tape theory and the cause and manner of death. Dr. G's conclusions did not have any scientific basis, IMO.

 

[kathyn2]

There are 3 different charges she could be charged with and you don't have to vote for the death penalty. She will probably be convicted on 1 of the other 2 charges altho I could certainly vote guilty of murder 1. I think she was also thinking of killing her parents too but hadn't got to it yet.

 

[Kat]

Just stopping by to say a bit Thank You to everyone that is posting freely about their doubts and worries about this case.

It really helps (I can only speak for myself) to see exactly what others are thinking.

And add that the last couple of pages have been exactly what I've been hearing too now that this case has national coverage. People just aren't so sure.

I know where I stand of course. I just wanted to say thank you!

 

[Reality Orlando]

Are those at your husband's company ignoring the 31 days? I think it could easily be seen as an accident and KC was afraid to tell her parents if not for...

...Duct tape on the face of the child who had been thrown out like garbage. Immediately following the *fatal accident*, the child's mother went out and partied hearty for 31 days, and the party only ended then because a distraught grandmother intervened looking for her granddaughter. Then...after being arrested and charged with the child's murder, the mother sits in jail for three years! before claiming the death was an accident.

I try not to think of any case as a slam dunk because it is true that you never know what a jury is going to do, but Good old fashioned Common Sense says Caylee's death was no accident!

Plus, I see nothing that points to KC being afraid of her parents.

Don't shoot the messenger! Lol, they don't feel the Prosecution proved the duct tape was over the mouth and nose. They're looking at it from "reasonable doubt." They don't feel there's concrete proof of anything except that KC didn't report her missing...and they think she panicked at first, and then just carried on with the charade as time went on. They definitely think there's something wrong with her. But they said they don't see one single thing in all the pics and videos except a loving mother who took good care of her daughter. Just their opinion...a mix of ages, male and female, barely out of HS to a master's degree. Just interesting that they are seeing things differently than many others.

 

[cluciano63]

Are they allowed to do that? I am not sure about that. I think that would result in a hung jury, they cannot just kick her out and ask for an alternate becaue she does not agree with the rest of them. If she thinks not guilty and refuses to change her mind it would just be a hung jury. The alternates are there in case a juror gets sick or has some type of family or other emergency during the duration of the trial and has to leave.

Alternates won't deliberate, they are dismissed before deliberation even starts...I'm pretty sure anyway. I think someone asked about this on the lawyer thread.

 

[Lera213]

I think the Jury does believe the duct tape was the cause of death and that the Chloroform was probably in the car, in a container probably to use on one of her night flings. The Chloroform was probably spilled in the trunk when Casey put Caylee in it.

 

[Lera213]

I follow a few live trial cases and prefer live feed cases vs. talking head media so I can draw my own opinions as a case progresses. I have particularly avoided this case, as I did anything about the Phil Specter Case, so I could build my opinion based on what the jury heard and that only.

Day one of this trial, I proudly listened to the State Opening thinking... yeah, she'll get the needle for sure! Then... here came the defenses opening, and I was stunned with the concept that the story could actually have legs... that is, reasonable doubt might not be hard to find. Or as Jose Baez put it "Reasonable Doubt isn't sprinkled throughout this case, It lives here."

As I listened intently for a clear how/when/where/why/who about Caylee's "murder", it never arrived. Even with all the circumstantial evidence provided, the State, IMO (which I'm certain is not popular) failed to meet the burden of proof. Now one day into the defense, and reasonable doubt isn't just here and there, it's starting to grow all over.

Sorry for being the "odd out" here, but I'm just calling it as if I were a juror, and yes, I could have been an unbiased juror in this case... in fact when it started, I would have probably been picked by the State.

Well sorry to say unlike you a lot of the juror's heard about this case. A few knew a lot about it too, they said they can put it aside though. :rolling:

 

[The Shoat]

Wow -- so the State's case is not a slam dunk; surely, this is not a surprise to the Websleuthers.

As someone who believes that KC fantasized about killing Caylee; that she killed her in a fit rage at the thought she would be kicked out of the house and CA would take custody of her baby; and that she showed no remorse in the immediate aftermath of Caylee's death; these are the problems I see with the State's case.

1) Because KC (and CA) had time to clean the car; the forensic evidence in the trunk is limited, not as much as would have been found had, say, a cop stopped her.
2) The decomposition of the corpse shows no cause or time of death.
3) No witnesses of the murder or disposal of the body.
4) Some very incriminating evidence was left out - her convictions on stolen checks, the weird death imagery she was posting online, those very guilty sounding poems and sayings as well.

To truly see KC's guilt, you need to view her actions during those 31 days. Especially, her activities from 6/15-6/20. Those are very damning; especially not reporting the death. Add to that the Zanny story, dumping the car, and lying to the police - you don't have to be rocket scientist to figure out what happened.

But her defense rightly conceded the 31 days to get them off the table by concocting a variation of the Menendez defense. Well, this made the State's case much shakier. Because, however, unbelievable her explanation, it puts the focus on the lack witnesses, the lack of forensics in the car, the lack of cause / time of death. The State is then reduced to bringing in bug specialists, etc -- this is complicated/dry testimony that the defense can question, however ridiculously, and give the impression of reasonable doubt.

I don't think KC will take the stand - she would never survive cross and is a proven liar. The smart move is to just let the ridiculous/unproven story be stated and all the questions regarding the complicated evidence hopefully make an impact.

Hopefully, the jury will see through the smoke screens of the defense and concentrate on what they know and was testified to about KC's behavior. But, IMHO, a death penalty conviction is not going to happen because -- she's not really the demographic for the death penalty and premeditation has not been proven.

I would be happy with child abuse leading to death, second degree murder (what I think happened), or anything else with max sentencing.

The irony is that the 31 days that make her so guilty also gave time for the physical evidence to deteriorate.

 

[Lera213]

Oh it is a slam dunk in the people that have followed and read every document that has come out. Remember it is REASONABLE DOUBT not all doubt. Common sense, some people have it some don't and some want big ratings. Child abuse that causes the death of a child in Florida is MURDER 1, Death Penalty or LWOP.

 

[GeekyGirl]

Oh it is a slam dunk in the people that have followed and read every document that has come out. Remember it is REASONABLE DOUBT not all doubt. Common sense, some people have it some don't and some want big ratings.

Respectfully, reasonable doubt is subjective. Most legal definitions equate it with "moral certainty" or, in less eloquent terms, "you better be pretty d*** sure". The jurors do not have access to all knowledge that people on this board do, so what seems obvious to you, may not be to them.

 

[DairyGirl]

To me, one of the defense's biggest problem is denying that Caylee was in the trunk of the Pontiac. I don't have a hard time at all believing that the jury will see that is a lie. Too many people reported the smell of decomp and sadly there is only one dead person in the equation. I could see blowing off the smell as some kind of flukey garbage smell when you don't know that someone is missing or dead but one you know that Caylee had been dead all along it only makes sense that the decomp was from her being in the trunk.

 

[Just Jayla]

Much has been made in the past about the potential for male jurors to have the hots for KC...On that note, AOL has done something tonight that made me giggle at the thought...they plastered a news story about KC, not looking her ABC party best these days, right next to a story with a pic of Hef's gorgeous ex-fiance. Gives a whole new meaning to what's hot and what's not.
Without getting too much into what I think of Casey's looks, I think the time for worrying about male jurors bypassing Caylee in lieu of KC's looks is long gone. I am happy to report, that through a juror's eyes, it will be the facts of this case that they can focus on, not KC's looks. Seems trivial, but if y'all remember the Debra Lafave case, you know why this is important.

 

[Donjeta]

I have decided to forget the heart shaped sticker for now. It could have been just random trash and as far as I can tell it hasn't been tied conclusively to the stickers in Casey's room. It is suggestive since what are the odds of finding a heart shaped sticker and heart shaped residue but I wish they had had the presence of mind to photograph the residue so the two could be compared.

 

[Albion]

Hello, this is my first post and this seemed like the appropriate place to put it given that up until a few weeks ago I knew nothing AT ALL about this case as I am in the UK and its hardly been reported here (the trial only once as far as I can recall).

I have been watching the trial with interest though, online. Trials here are not broadcast/televised at all (though there are plans to change that in the pipeline right now). So its been a bit of an eye opener to see a US trial in action. I have sat on a jury in the UK and its a different experience. The laws are very alike but the feel is different.

Anyway, I digress! As it stands today I feel the jury "should" find Casey Anthony guilty. Whether they will is unknown of course! If they do, I think she'll get life, no parole. I feel the prosecution have ably demonstrated that poor Caylee was murdered via the use of 3 strips of duct tape. Had it been just one piece then this would be a manslaughter case IMO. But it is three. And the way her body was so crudely disposed of speaks volumes as to this being a murder rather than an accidental death in a swimming pool.

In my eyes there is enough circumstantial evidence to come to that conclusion. I always apply Occams Razor to situations and this only goes to reinforce my belief.

As for the trial, well the defence team are something to behold. Really! But underneath the ineptness is something I find worse - there is no integrity. As people have been saying, the whole "throwing under the bus" attitude is really vile and smacks of desperation. I know it could be argued that they are doing all they can - anything - to get her off the DP. But the old saying about "doth protesting TOO MUCH" rings true. Sometimes less is more and I feel the defence have gone too far one way and this only highlights their own failings and their weak defence.

I think the jury is expecting to hear about how Casey was abused, about the death in the pool, Mr Krunk, and all the things related to that. If that isn't done (and I don't believe it can be because I think its all utter nonsense) then I don't see how they will have a problem with a guilty verdict. There is not enough reasonable doubt. IMO.

 

[Donjeta]

Great first post!

:welcome: