We the jury find the defendant Casey Anthony...

[Zak]

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.

Exactly!! There is no innocent explanation for the duct tape being stuck to Caylee's hair. It had to be on her face and hair when she was dumped in the woody area. Had it been wrapped around the plastic garbage bags then it would still be there or plastic residue from the bags as they became brittle would be found on the tape. Duct tape does not come off of a plastic garbage bag just the same as it did not come off of Caylee's hair, even after being under water. Plus the 3 pieces were not long enough to have been wrapped around the bags with her body in it. The duct tape was stuck to her hair and face until complete decomposition (no skin was left). At that time there was nothing left to stick to on the face but it stayed stuck to the hair.
Gosh, I hope that I have explained that correctly.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

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 couldn't , 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.

There were never any reports of child abuse either when Susan Smith decided to drive her car into the lake and murder her two little boys. The child abuse was done to Caylee shortly before death. It takes only one act for it to be aggravated child abuse.

The evidence does not support that anyone moved the skull. The jurors will be able to see very detailed closeup photos and video of Caylee's skull before it was handled by the ME assistant. The duct tape was still there because before she died it was stuck to her hair. Imo, Caylee had a guardian angel looking over her that kept it there so that people would know what her mother had done to her.

As Ashton said it is clear that the skull was not moved and even had 2-3 inches of leafs all around it and snarled roots and vines hanging overhead.

GA denied an affair. Other than that George was very truthful. He stood up for Caylee even though he still loves his daughter who has tried her very best to destroy him with her pathological lies.

IMO

 

[krkrjx]

Since the state does not have to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt, I would vote guilty on all counts.

I have doubt about a few things that I believe are assumed rather than proven, but I have no doubt whatsoever that Casey killed her child and that it was intentional. If Casey had accidentally killed Caylee, she would have reported the accident or at least fessed up at some point over the past three years. Plus there is no accident I can think of that would leave duct tape on a child's face.

 

[I Must Break You]

Guilty 1st Degree, my opinion may not be popular, but I don't care whether she premeditated it or it was an accident with chloroform... either way she killed that little baby and deserves nothing less than life in prison and at most put down, tied up in a trash bag and thrown in a swamp.

 

[CharlestonGal]

Count 1 - 1st Degree Murder - Guilty

Count 2 - Aggravated Child Abuse - Guilty

Count 3 - Aggravated Manslaughter - Not Guilty

Counts 4-7 - Lying to LE - Guilty

I don't think the jury is going to have much difficulty finding ICA guilty of 1st Degree Murder, but they may not be willing to go that far due to ICAs youth, gender, and status as the victim's mother. I think they'll drop it to the most serious charge that does not trigger the death penalty, no matter what they really believe.

I think the jury knows exactly what ICA did - 1st degree murder - but they are going to get stuck because some of them are not comfortable with the possibility of the DP and I think that is what the majority of the disagreement/discussion will be about in the jury room. In the end, even if all of them had already concluded 1st degree before even walking into the jury room (as I did) they are going to go round and round because some of them will not be willing to open the door to the DP.

I think after all is said and done they will come back with either 2nd degree or manslaughter - not because it makes the most sense based on evidence, but because of the specter of the DP. I also think JP will send them back to that jury room for weeks if necessary to force an agreement. If that happens, the 1st degree jury members will eventually cave to 2nd degree in order to end the stalemate.

I also believe that if ICA were a man, that jury would have been back already with a 1st degree verdict. No doubt about it.

My opinion, as always.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

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.

I have been a juror five times in my lifetime. I never let my gut reaction tell me anything when I deliberated on a case. I took the evidence and applied the law to reach my determinations.

I believe that the PT has laid their case out very well. It wasnt all about drama but about applying commonsense and logic when looking at the evidence in its totality to be used in order to find the answer they need.

Juries tend to not discount evidence as mere coincidences. Imo, they see 'coincidences' in a murder trial as having some type of intended purpose. Just like the finding of chloroform, internet searches and duct tape on a deceased child thrown away in a swampy area.

While Baez made much fuss about George having the duct tape he purposefully omitted who also would have as much access to this tape. I realize that it is his job to create diversions but I do not think he hoodwinked any of that jury. They know this was Casey's home too. They know that Cindy had never seen the Big Trouble t-shirt before.

Whether I hung this jury or not I would stand by my own held opinion based on the evidence and the law and vote for First Degree. PM/FM

IMO

 

[krkrjx]

Count 1 - 1st Degree Murder - Guilty

Count 2 - Aggravated Child Abuse - Guilty

Count 3 - Aggravated Manslaughter - Not Guilty

Counts 4-7 - Lying to LE - Guilty

I don't think the jury is going to have much difficulty finding ICA guilty of 1st Degree Murder, but they may not be willing to go that far due to ICAs youth, gender, and status as the victim's mother. I think they'll drop it to the most serious charge that does not trigger the death penalty, no matter what they really believe.

I think the jury knows exactly what ICA did - 1st degree murder - but they are going to get stuck because some of them are not comfortable with the possibility of the DP and I think that is what the majority of the disagreement/discussion will be about in the jury room. In the end, even if all of them had already concluded 1st degree before even walking into the jury room (as I did) they are going to go round and round because some of them will not be willing to open the door to the DP.

I think after all is said and done they will come back with either 2nd degree or manslaughter - not because it makes the most sense based on evidence, but because of the specter of the DP. I also think JP will send them back to that jury room for weeks if necessary to force an agreement. If that happens, the 1st degree jury members will eventually cave to 2nd degree in order to end the stalemate.

I also believe that if ICA were a man, that jury would have been back already with a 1st degree verdict. No doubt about it.

My opinion, as always.

I really like this, in theory. The only real problem with what I have bolded is this is exactly what the jury is not supposed to do. What they must do is evaluate the evidence to determine if the state has proven its case. AFTER they do that, if they believe the state has proven first degree murder, they can consider gender, age, etc., in the penalty phase. By law, they are not supposed to consider this in the guilt phase.

 

[burbqueen]

Oceablue eyes! Bravo!!! I feel the same.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Count 1 - 1st Degree Murder - Guilty

Count 2 - Aggravated Child Abuse - Guilty

Count 3 - Aggravated Manslaughter - Not Guilty

Counts 4-7 - Lying to LE - Guilty

I don't think the jury is going to have much difficulty finding ICA guilty of 1st Degree Murder, but they may not be willing to go that far due to ICAs youth, gender, and status as the victim's mother. I think they'll drop it to the most serious charge that does not trigger the death penalty, no matter what they really believe.

I think the jury knows exactly what ICA did - 1st degree murder - but they are going to get stuck because some of them are not comfortable with the possibility of the DP and I think that is what the majority of the disagreement/discussion will be about in the jury room. In the end, even if all of them had already concluded 1st degree before even walking into the jury room (as I did) they are going to go round and round because some of them will not be willing to open the door to the DP.

I think after all is said and done they will come back with either 2nd degree or manslaughter - not because it makes the most sense based on evidence, but because of the specter of the DP. I also think JP will send them back to that jury room for weeks if necessary to force an agreement. If that happens, the 1st degree jury members will eventually cave to 2nd degree in order to end the stalemate.

I also believe that if ICA were a man, that jury would have been back already with a 1st degree verdict. No doubt about it.

My opinion, as always.

I certainly hope this does not come to pass but I am afraid you could be partially correct.

ICA has everything going for her in her favor according to crime statistics.

White
Female
Young
Somewhat attractive
Middle Class

However I certainly hope that the jury does not violate their oaths. They are NOT to consider the sentencing phase first in order to make their determination of guilt. They are to remain true to their oath. In fact at this phase they are not to weigh that at all. If they even deliberate or mention that in this phase they are violating their oath.

It only takes 7 who thinks she deserves death for a recommendation to be given to Judge Perry.

I will be so glad when gender bias is taken out of the equation in our justice system. It is failing the very victims who are the most defenseless of all in our society.

It makes the saying 'I brought you into this world and I can take you out" ring true. Children who are murdered cant be devalued simply because it was their own mother who murdered them.

We cannot lay a lifeless child on the scale of justice that was murdered by their mother and then place another lifeless child on the other scale that was murdered by their fathers and then give them unequal justice according to which gender parent murdered them. That cannot be acceptable. We have to support ALL murdered children equally ................not just some.

IMO

 

[CharlestonGal]

I really like this, in theory. The only real problem with what I have bolded is this is exactly what the jury is not supposed to do. What they must do is evaluate the evidence to determine if the state has proven its case. AFTER they do that, if they believe the state has proven first degree murder, they can consider gender, age, etc., in the penalty phase. By law, they are not supposed to consider this in the guilt phase.

I know, and I agree with you - the jury is not supposed to do this, but unfortunately they sometimes do. Some of them are even honest about it afterwards when they are interviewed. It is difficult for many people to separate their decisions from the consequences of those decisions, juries included.

Juries are comprised of human beings, with all their quirks.

 

[CharlestonGal]

I certainly hope this does not come to pass but I am afraid you could be partially correct.

ICA has everything going for her in her favor according to crime statistics.

White
Female
Young
Somewhat attractive
Middle Class

However I certainly hope that the jury does not violate their oaths. They are NOT to consider the sentencing phase first in order to make their determination of guilt. They are to remain true to their oath. In fact at this phase they are not to weigh that at all. If they even deliberate or mention that in this phase they are violating their oath.

It only takes 7 who thinks she deserves death for a recommendation to be given to Judge Perry.

I will be so glad when gender bias is taken out of the equation in our justice system. It is failing the very victims who are the most defenseless of all in our society.

It makes the saying 'I brought you into this world and I can take you out" ring true. Children who are murdered cant be devalued simply because it was their own mother who murdered them.

We cannot lay a lifeless child on the scale of justice that was murdered by their mother and then place another lifeless child on the other scale that was murdered by their fathers and then give them unequal justice according to which gender parent murdered them. That cannot be acceptable. We have to support ALL murdered children equally ................not just some.

IMO

BBM. I know they are not "supposed" to consider the sentence when they deliberate, but interviews with jurors have shown that they do, even if just in their own heads. This is one reason the state sometimes decides to not pursue the death penalty; it complicates deliberations and can impact the verdict. In FL this impact can be even greater because only 7 of the 12 jury members have to vote DP, so each individual juror knows he/she cannot stop it alone. They need 5 other jurors to vote against the DP with them.

People think about these things - even if they are instructed not to.

My opinion, as always.

 

[GeekyGirl]

I have been a juror five times in my lifetime. I never let my gut reaction tell me anything when I deliberated on a case. I took the evidence and applied the law to reach my determinations.

I believe that the PT has laid their case out very well. It wasnt all about drama but about applying commonsense and logic when looking at the evidence in its totality to be used in order to find the answer they need.

Juries tend to not discount evidence as mere coincidences. Imo, they see 'coincidences' in a murder trial as having some type of intended purpose. Just like the finding of chloroform, internet searches and duct tape on a deceased child thrown away in a swampy area.

While Baez made much fuss about George having the duct tape he purposefully omitted who also would have as much access to this tape. I realize that it is his job to create diversions but I do not think he hoodwinked any of that jury. They know this was Casey's home too. They know that Cindy had never seen the Big Trouble t-shirt before.

Whether I hung this jury or not I would stand by my own held opinion based on the evidence and the law and vote for First Degree. PM/FM

IMO

I wish I could be as could be as sure, but I'm just not. The state almost completely avoided the chloroform in their closing and IMO the jury will notice that and wonder why. You don't spend days on forensic evidence to prove chloroform was involved and then barely mention in it closing unless there's a problem with. I think the duct tape is their strongest shot at getting a first degree conviction, premeditated. MOO

 

[Who_What_When]

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

I can respect what your saying, but even if they all say she is guilty they still have to deterimine what she is guilty of, this would take more than a few minutes.

 

[Who_What_When]

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 too was a juror and the first thing we did (which I think is pretty standard) was take a vote. From there we deliberated for two days.

 

[mrye4709]

Guilty 1st degree. If it had been an accident she would have spilled it all long before now, she would not have sit in jail for 3 yrs. She had many opportunities to admit to an accident, she chose not to, which does surprise me. I'm sure if she had claimed it was an accident then she would not be up against the DP.

I do think the duct tape was around her mouth and nose or at least her mouth, even w/o dna. The mouth would be enough to kill if the baby was crying (my nose gets totally blocked when I cry). The tape being stuck to the hair is what does it for me. I hope she did use the cloroform so Caylee wasn't awake.

We didn't see the pictures and I don't want to, but what I understood RK to say is he tilted it up a little and let it go back. I could go out right now and pry something out of the leaves and dirt and it go back into position w/o showing I had moved it if it was done carefully. I want to think that since he knew it could be a skull and was careful with it.

I wanted her to get a fair trial, I want the jury to take the time needed and I want justice for Caylee Marie. I hope her family can move on and heal from all the hate and media attacks. No family is perfect, but I don't think ICA was abused.

There are too many of these cases. It breaks my heart to think these people who are supposed to love and protect these children are losing it like this. Social activities (including f/b and myspace) are taking priority over children. WTH is wrong with people?

If ICA would have shown some real emotions during the trial then I may have a different view. What I seen was hate for her parents and only tears were for herself. I would like her to get the DP, but LWOP would be ok, too. I don't want her to ever feel freedom again.

 

[Who_What_When]

Just a little nit. There is no such thing as an "Innocent" verdict. Also, "not guilty" != innocent. It only means the jury felt there was not enough evidence to convict.

It was an error and has since been changed.

 

[Who_What_When]

I mean no disrespect to anyone, but how in the world did anyone vote NOT GUILTY of Counts Four Through Seven (lying to officers)??? I would love to know how this is possible especially since her DT admitted she lied.

 

[laserdisc10]

If I were a member of the jury I'd opt without hesitation for 'guilty'

The reason being that Casey Anthony has chosen NOT to explain how her daughter went from being in her care to a bag in a swamp

Casey Anthony has had innumerable opportunities to explain. She's chosen not to do so, other than to tell easily-disproved LIES, such as 'the nanny took her'. There was no nanny

31 days she had. Followed by three years in jail. With several months in between, during which she played victim and lied through her teeth

As she has NO plausible explanation as to how her daughter went from being alive to becoming a skeleton in a swamp, Casey Anthony has demonstrated to my satisfaction that she killed and disposed of her own child and that spells 'guilty' to me

 

[angeldust]

I can respect what your saying, but even if they all say she is guilty they still have to deterimine what she is guilty of, this would take more than a few minutes.

LOL agreed it would take me ten minutes..... is that enuff

u see I dont buy any of the dt crap or kc s for that matter she deliberately killed that baby, i believe she killed caylee in her home, with her bare hands then carried her out the car....

imo murder is murder no matter how you want to dress it up she is heinious so i wouldnt be debating with myself is it first or second is it manslaughter IT is ABUNDANTLY clear to me she killed her baby so no i wouldnt waste anymore than 10 minutes on her good job Im not on a jury eh x a

 

[susan1122]

I wish I could be as could be as sure, but I'm just not. The state almost completely avoided the chloroform in their closing and IMO the jury will notice that and wonder why. You don't spend days on forensic evidence to prove chloroform was involved and then barely mention in it closing unless there's a problem with. I think the duct tape is their strongest shot at getting a first degree conviction, premeditated. MOO

Interesting......gets me thinking. Were they actually trying to avoid bringing CA into the closing? Cindy's lie was very intwined with the chloroform. IIRC they did not talk about CA's perjury. Was this what the judge was talking about when he told them to send in a formal request(?) something like that. My memory isn't great sometimes. I may have to listen again.