We the jury find the defendant Casey Anthony...

[DIXIECAT]

GUILTY of FIRST DEGREE FELONY MURDER! Although I have personally believed this for a long time, I wasn't sure until the last few minutes of LDB's CS that THE JURY will also deliver this verdict.

:twocents:

 

[MysteryAddict]

Absolutely guilty on every charge!

 

[Who_What_When]

For me, there is what I would call primary and secondary evidence. For instance, primary evidence to me would be first and foremost 31 days and that it wasn't the mother that reported anything - it was the grandmother. Next is the rather celebratory behavior during those 31 days with the tatoo being the icing on the cake. Next would be lying about where Caylee was when confronted by LE. Once I came to the conclusion that those primary pieces of evidence had me leaning towards she was culpable of something untoward happening to her daughter, I'd move to secondary evidence - forensics.

What forensic evidence either supports or discounts the direction I'm leaning. Without going through all the forensics evidence in this case, I'll just keep it short and say that I am much more convinced by the prosecution witnesses than I was by any of the defense expert witnesses.

We are supposed to keep emotion out of our decision making process and ask our selves is there any "reasonable" doubt, not any doubt. Emotion could go either way - one way would be to be so distraught about what happened to this baby to want to make someone pay, period. The other emotion could be just not being able to believe how on earth a mother could do this to her child so therefore you are unable to even consider the evidence. Both emotions need to be set aside.

For me, at this point, not only is reasonable doubt removed, I believe it is unreasonable to think she is not guilty of 1st degree murder. I feel so strong about that decision that I would not be able to compromise to a lesser charge.

Although I appreciate your thoughts I'm not sure what your comment has to do with my post?

I said that in a death penalty case I would hope that the juror would give it more thought than a few minutes. Even if they feel all the evidence points to the defendant I would still hope that they would go through what they thought happened and how they came to the conclusion. This is someone’s life that is in their hands and regardless of whether they like her or feel that she is a monster, they must take the responsibility seriously. This was in response to your original post where you said that “there is an issue with "too much" thought as well, collectively, in our country”

 

[GeekyGirl]

I just went back to watch the computer expert's testimony. The deleted internet history ranged from March 4 - March 21 2008. I don't recall there ever being testimony about when these searches were actually deleted, but I might have forgotten. I have seen others on here say that they were deleted on July 16th, but I'm not sure if that was brought up at trial or if that information comes from somewhere else. I also don't recall if there was any testimony that the entire Firefox browser was deleted. Sorry I couldn't be more help!

Here's a link to the computer expert talking about the deleted history and the dates (where he says March 4-21):
http://www.wftv.com/video/28423426/index.html
It starts around the 28:00 mark.

*sigh* I'm getting so confused at to what the actually jurors know versus what I know from here. I can't remember, how much, if any, testimony did the hear about when the searches were deleted?

 

[GeekyGirl]

For me, there is what I would call primary and secondary evidence. For instance, primary evidence to me would be first and foremost 31 days and that it wasn't the mother that reported anything - it was the grandmother. Next is the rather celebratory behavior during those 31 days with the tatoo being the icing on the cake. Next would be lying about where Caylee was when confronted by LE. Once I came to the conclusion that those primary pieces of evidence had me leaning towards she was culpable of something untoward happening to her daughter, I'd move to secondary evidence - forensics.

What forensic evidence either supports or discounts the direction I'm leaning. Without going through all the forensics evidence in this case, I'll just keep it short and say that I am much more convinced by the prosecution witnesses than I was by any of the defense expert witnesses.

We are supposed to keep emotion out of our decision making process and ask our selves is there any "reasonable" doubt, not any doubt. Emotion could go either way - one way would be to be so distraught about what happened to this baby to want to make someone pay, period. The other emotion could be just not being able to believe how on earth a mother could do this to her child so therefore you are unable to even consider the evidence. Both emotions need to be set aside.

For me, at this point, not only is reasonable doubt removed, I believe it is unreasonable to think she is not guilty of 1st degree murder. I feel so strong about that decision that I would not be able to compromise to a lesser charge.

This a very thoughtful post, and I respect your opinion. I'm curious, hypothetically, based on your last statement if you were a juror and the votes were split, would you hold out if it meant a hung jury?

 

[kimmera]

*sigh* I'm getting so confused at to what the actually jurors know versus what I know from here. I can't remember, how much, if any, testimony did the hear about when the searches were deleted?

My understanding is that she deleted the Firefox files on July16th, and IIRC, Det. Melich was in the home at that time. She was allegedly going through her PC looking for info about Zanny. I am sure that this came out during the trial, because I didn't know about it before. The timing on that is pretty damning, IMO. :twocents:

 

[GeekyGirl]

My understanding is that she deleted the Firefox files on July16th, and IIRC, Det. Melich was in the home at that time. She was allegedly going through her PC looking for info about Zanny. I am sure that this came out during the trial, because I didn't know about it before. The timing on that is pretty damning, IMO. :twocents:

It is strange, might look almost too strange to them. I think if I were a juror I'd be wondering why the state didn't clear up the possible 84 searches discrepancy and what weight I could give to the computer expert's testimony. It might depend on how well the IT guy can interpret and explain to the others that the two things aren't necessarily related.

 

[angeldust]

Although I appreciate your thoughts I'm not sure what your comment has to do with my post?

I said that in a death penalty case I would hope that the juror would give it more thought than a few minutes. Even if they feel all the evidence points to the defendant I would still hope that they would go through what they thought happened and how they came to the conclusion. This is someone’s life that is in their hands and regardless of whether they like her or feel that she is a monster, they must take the responsibility seriously. This was in response to your original post where you said that “there is an issue with "too much" thought as well, collectively, in our country”

Thing is though, the jury have been listening to evidence for 8WEEKS now, it has been going through their minds EVERY day and night for 8 Weeks I presume they will have more or less came to some conclusion so It may not take that long IMO enough time and money has been taken up by that waste of space kc x a

 

[com n sense]

Murder in the first degree. If that duct tape was innocent Casey would have told the truth, or atleast part truth about the duct tape a long time ago.

 

[Paulette]

I understand everyone's initial feelings but I would hope that the jury gives it more thought than that or this country is in trouble! lol

I was a juror. A juror can decide the instant the trial is over if the perp is innocent or guilty. We went into a private room and voted on guilt or innocence immediately after selecting a jury foreman. The one hold-out was the only reason for deliberating. We won her over - it took 5 days.

 

[dr dona]

guilty on all counts---based on the evidence and common sense. I spent half of yesterday trying to come up with any evidence to support a verdict of not guilty and I couldn't do it. And, yes I am so convinced that I would not change my position even if it made for a hung jury!!!!!

 

[NeedAnswers]

I was a juror. A juror can decide the instant the trial is over if the perp is innocent or guilty. We went into a private room and voted on guilt or innocence immediately after selecting a jury foreman. The one hold-out was the only reason for deliberating. We won her over - it took 5 days.

I am 29 years old and I have been called to Jury Duty twice in my life. Both times, I was selected to serve on a jury. Both times, I knew the verdict within a day, if not the moment I walked into the deliberation room.
Jurors take their jobs very seriously. If these people did not want to serve on a jury, they would have come up with an excuse or a way out. But jurors are very serious and oftentimes, arguments happen just for the sake of arguing and hashing it all out with each other, to make sure we are ALL on the same page.
The first jury I was on was a week long trial about a civil matter. We debated for 5 days. We asked the judge, "What do we do if we cannot come up with an agreement??" The answer was, you will sit here until you do. Then it becomes the majority vote trying to convince the one or two jurors that are holding out. We hashed and rehashed the evidence and there was almost gonna be a fight in the jury room. It was crazy! Finally, the lone holdout gave in. I feel bad that he had to "give in", but he was clearly wrong!!!!!
The second jury I was on was only a day long, we deliberated for approx 20 min before declaring the defendant not guilty. We all knew what we believed, but when we went in the deliberation room, we argued just for the sake of arguing. Just to make sure there was no doubt in our minds.

I think this case will take a while to come up with a verdict. At LEAST a few days. There is SO MUCH EVIDENCE and I guarantee you that they are going to want to review the evidence, like the suicide letter and things like that. They wrote notes of stuff they wanted to go back and look at again.

Anyway I just wanted to offer my experience as a juror in two different types of trials. I really enjoyed each one, but the more I think about it, the more I remember that being a juror, and taking it so seriously, they really do presume innocence. In my jury, the state did not meet their burden of proof. I think in this case, the state DID.
IMHO, of course, and please let this verdict come soooooon! The suspense is killing me! Its like a movie that has dragged out for three years, you go to the theater for the last installment, and then right at the climax it says, 'to be continued, fall of 2012', or something!
:banghead:

 

[ColdDayIn]

Guilty on everything. I shamefully admit that if I were sitting on that jury, I would be the one doing everything in my power to sway other's votes to match mine. I don't even know if I would even be able to listen to other's arguments with an open mind, or listen to them at all because I have never in my life been so sure about someone being guilty of something.

 

[ColdDayIn]

I was a juror. A juror can decide the instant the trial is over if the perp is innocent or guilty. We went into a private room and voted on guilt or innocence immediately after selecting a jury foreman. The one hold-out was the only reason for deliberating. We won her over - it took 5 days.

I totally agree. I think it's human nature to have an instinct and to want to follow those instincts, which is why I believe every juror knew walking into that room today what they already thought. It's just going to be a matter of if everyone agrees and if not, everyone getting on the same page.

 

[shefner]

I think both the prosecution and the defense did a very good job with what they had. The defense is getting creamed but face it, JB's job is simply to place doubts in the prosecution's theory. He is working hard to protect and defend his client....and that's a hard job in this case.

I think Casey is probably guilty of more than the prosecution was able to prove. She seems like a very disturbed person...and sadly, I think her family has had lots of issues through the years that may have contributed to this. But Casey is still responsible for her actions. And my heart breaks for the Anthony family because there is no restoration for them.

I don't think the State proved Murder 1 ....maybe count 2....most likely count 3....definitely 4-7.

 

[crucibelle]

I've changed my mind after hearing the State's rebuttal & the instructions to the jury.

-Guilty on all counts.

 

[GeekyGirl]

I totally agree. I think it's human nature to have an instinct and to want to follow those instincts, which is why I believe every juror knew walking into that room today what they already thought. It's just going to be a matter of if everyone agrees and if not, everyone getting on the same page.

This is so interesting to me. I love hearing how other people think. For me, there are times in my life when I definitely rely on my "gut instinct" but serving as a juror would not be one of them. I've had jury duty twice, and the first time my "gut reaction" ended up being the same as my final vote after deliberation. The second time I walked into the jury room confident that I knew what I was going to vote but after 4 days of deliberation I went in the complete opposite direction. Even 4 years later, I know I made the right decision by changing my vote, and it scares me to remember how sure I was that defendant was guilty in the beginning. I believe everyone is different, and what works for some may not work for others, but for me personally, my gut just isn't enough. MOO

ETA: I'd never be able to vote for acquittal in this case, it would come down to choosing between agg manslaughter and first degree.

 

[Soulmagent]

If I was on the jury I would have to find her not guilty.

The duct tape at the scene , the skull sitting in it correct position (rare) on it mandible (rare) after floods ,animal activity. I could not use that evidence to convict a person because RK did move the skull and he did move the bag and he did tell more stories and have 7 depos and duct tape was not on the skull it was in the hair mass with the mandible resting on it.

GA acted like a liar.
All her friends said she was a good mom. No child abuse reported.

No evidence the tape was ever on Caylee's face. No proof of a homicide.

She will most likely be convicted and that will be in gods hands but I couldnt , no based on what was said in court and what I felt was important evidence and what was said

IMO and Yes I watched the trial I do not believe the state proved this case beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

[drip~drop]

Who will be distraught if she is aquitted ?

Me for darn sure. That would be the worse case scenerio.:maddening:

 

[oceanblueeyes]

GUILTY of FIRST DEGREE FELONY MURDER! Although I have personally believed this for a long time, I wasn't sure until the last few minutes of LDB's CS that THE JURY will also deliver this verdict.

:twocents:

I believed from the start this was a first degree murder. I do believe the chloroform and duct tape evidence to be true. I never believe in coincidences during a murder trial. So therefore I believe she is guilty of premeditated murder and felony murder.

I was more assured after hearing Ashton's powerful CA and absolutely positive once I heard LDBs outstanding no nonsense CA.

Both of these prosecutors are very gifted. They know how to layout all the evidence in a way that even a layperson can easily understand it.