What Would PROVE KC Did It? POLL ADDED

[natsound]

KC said that ZFG had a key to the house (yeah I know it's bs but it's out there) so anything that came from the house will be said to have been taken by ZFG.

I believe it's already been proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Zani the nanny, as KC has presented her, does not exist, therefore any claims that Zani took items from the A home are false. Who agrees/disagrees?

 

[natsound]

Evidence items that prove KC did it:

1. fingerprints (hopefully)
2. death band on Caylee's hair in the car
3. a positive match on the duct tape found at the scene/duct tape found at the house, along with proof that no one else living in the house could have done it.

I guess that raises the question: have GA, CA and LA already been ruled out as murder suspects?

 

[natsound]

31 days. I can't get past that. As a parent, I can't imagine waiting 31 days to report a 2 year old child missing.

31 days doesn't prove anything though.

 

[Devon]

IMO, there is no evidence as yet that proves KC deliberately murdered her child. There is much evidence that very strongly suggests that she knew all along that Caylee was dead, actually hid her body and then covered up and lied to everyone, acting as if everything was fine and dandy. But nothing that I have seen yet proves how and why Caylee died, or whether it was a deliberate killing, the result of a sudden loss of control or the result of some form of negligence by KC - e.g. not watching Caylee properly around the home/yard, leaving her sleeping in an inadequately ventilated car or giving her too much medication to get her to sleep.

Her behaviour after the event appears to be that of someone who just doesn't give a damn, but it could just as easily be that of a cowardly, weak and immature girl, who believed that her lies would once again get her out of trouble. The reason that she isn't talking is because she knows it is her fault that Caylee is dead, but whether that 'fault' is actually a deliberate act or some degree of negligence remains to be seen. I think it's all the same to her - Caylee died through either her act or omission, and whichever it was, she would rather lie than tell the truth.

So, what evidence proves she intentionally murdered Caylee? IMO, if there is some, we haven't seen it yet. Even the duct tape proves nothing, unless it can be shown that it was applied whilst Caylee was alive, and that it contributed to her death.

 

[MyTinkieGirl]

31 days doesn't prove anything though.

You are correct...BUT, in Caseys statement, she uses the date as "June 9th" as when she dropped Caylee off with Zanny...BUT on 911 phone call she specifically says "31 days". If my child were missing AND I thought she were in danger because I was told she would be harmed if I talked to the police - OR if I were "afraid to tell police" because I saw it on a TV show - OR I had to follow a script - OR my family was in danger, etc (pick an excuse) - In essence, I would remember on what DAY I last saw my daughter....not the "amount" of days...AND, I wouldn't need to change my story AFTER proof contrary to my statement was found. From June 9th changed to June 16th....

 

[natsound]

You are correct...BUT, in Caseys statement, she uses the date as "June 9th" as when she dropped Caylee off with Zanny...BUT on 911 phone call she specifically says "31 days". If my child were missing AND I thought she were in danger because I was told she would be harmed if I talked to the police - OR if I were "afraid to tell police" because I saw it on a TV show - OR I had to follow a script - OR my family was in danger, etc (pick an excuse) - In essence, I would remember on what DAY I last saw my daughter....not the "amount" of days...AND, I wouldn't need to change my story AFTER proof contrary to my statement was found. From June 9th changed to June 16th....

I understand that, but it still doesn't prove anything. It's not a fingerprint, or blood, or bodily fluid. Changing a story doesn't prove anything either. She could change her story 50 times, but that doesn't put blood on her hands.

 

[MyTinkieGirl]

And....of course, Casey's prints on the duct tape "sticky side" would be great...maybe matching the heart sticker to those in her room....
IIRC...when Casey mentioned about Zanny having a key to the house, Cindy seemed quite surprised and said something like "she does??".
And, the supposed "squirrel" plastered under her fender (?) that she pryed off....Casey seemed to try to make remarks to cover her a$$ for the smell...IIRC, LE took scrapings from the area she said she "got rid of" said squirrel. I can be pretty positive that evidence will come back neg for squirrel remains.

ETA : Again, lack of squirrel only proves a decomp instance occured in trunk as results show...and we know it was Caylee due to hair with death band.

 

[Lili]

IMO the duct tape could hold a wealth of information, not only
fingerprint(s). but also perhaps a stray hair, lint from clothing belonging to KC or from the home. Lots of possibilities.

 

[MyTinkieGirl]

Also...as far as debunking the "zanny had a key" or that she did this horrible thing instead of Casey....wouldn't there be prints/or lack of finger prints from this mythical creature ?? Obviously nothing to compare them to, but one would think LE made sure just WHOSE finger prints were in Caylee's room....and that they weren't from a stranger. If Zanny had a key, "her prints" - at least ONE, would be pretty easy to find at least SOMEWHERE in Caylee's room.
I KNOW there was a parade of "strangers" thru her room, with Greta and crew, etc., this was just another thought I had to help debunk "Zanny did it in their house" theory.

 

[thelmadawg]

Although there is a ton of circumstantial evidence, and LE most likely believes they can convict on that, I would bet my last dollar they are diligently looking for a piece or pieces of direct evidence that links KC, and ONLY KC to Caylee's homicide.

So far it seems to me we have:

Decomp in the car
The Duct Tape (Possible fingerprints) or match to gas cans
The Garbage Bag containing Caylee's remains
The Laundry Bag containing Caylee's remains?

What else haven't we thought of -- for instance, why the strong interest in those CD's and DVD's?

 

[MyTinkieGirl]

Although there is a ton of circumstantial evidence, and LE most likely believes they can convict on that, I would bet my last dollar they are diligently looking for a piece or pieces of direct evidence that links KC, and ONLY KC to Caylee's homicide.

So far it seems to me we have:

Decomp in the car
The Duct Tape (Possible fingerprints) or match to gas cans
The Garbage Bag containing Caylee's remains
The Laundry Bag containing Caylee's remains?

What else haven't we thought of -- for instance, why the strong interest in those CD's and DVD's?

Don't know about DVD's....but I still think the heart sticker is great evidence, as well, if matched to stickers from the house. JMO

 

[Tinsel]

LE is probably saving even more information on physical evidence that we haven't heard yet.

I'm sure they are looking for skin cells on the tape--they can get DNA from waistbands and shoes--so probably they can get it from tape too.

They are probably looking at the baby's hair to see if there is any evidence of drugs used on a regular basis.

They were very much interested in KC's shoes. So if the swamp area had a specific type of soil, they can get a match with that to the location.

I've heard that that juries are primarily interested in the suspect's demeanor after a disappearance and at trial.

:chicken:

 

[bogeygal]

Maybe there is trace evidence from KC's closet, the clothing or shoes she wore while disposing of Caylee? A stain that ties her to the trunk or the dump site?

 

[Tinsel]

The defense doesn't have to prove anything - the burden of proof is on the state to prove their charge that KC deliberately murdered Caylee. The question then, is what evidence proves that a premeditated and intentional murder of Caylee was carried out by KC? That is the 'it' in the title of this thread, unless the OP meant something different.

My answer there would be that it did not appear to be a staged kidnapping/murder because of the personal items like the blanket and heart sticker and close proximity. Those aren't things you would do if you were staging a kidnapping.

Also the use of duct tape, particularlly in the hair shows that KC never intended pulling the tape off. It was put there to stay. And moreover, a child that age would tattle on her. This was premeditated murder.

:chicken:

 

[Marina2]

Doubt can be brought on every piece of evidence named in this thread. The question is: Is it a reasonable doubt or an unreasonable doubt? The jury is allowed to have doubt and still convict as long as the doubt is unreasonable. This is proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The doubt that can be put on this evidence is very unreasonable to me. The defense can say that Caylee died as a result of an accident but it's unreasonable to me that KC would not report this or admit it after 6 months. They can give reasons why she showed no remorse and never mentioned her daughter being missing but I'm sure this would be unreasonable to me. The defense can say Zanny had a key but that is pretty unreasonable since she doesn't exist. They can say that someone else killed Caylee and placed her in the trunk but that's unreasonable to me since KC is the only one that had that car during that time. I could go on and on. A lot of doubt can be placed on this evidence but to me it's unreasonable and I could convict her.
None of the evidence is absolute proof. But, you know what, the prosecution doesn't have to show absolute proof. All they have to do is show proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Given the totality of the evidence against KC, they should have no problem.

 

[Devon]

My answer there would be that it did not appear to be a staged kidnapping/murder because of the personal items like the blanket and heart sticker and close proximity. Those aren't things you would do if you were staging a kidnapping.

Also the use of duct tape, particularlly in the hair shows that KC never intended pulling the tape off. It was put there to stay. And moreover, a child that age would tattle on her. This was premeditated murder.

:chicken:

I don't see how the fact that KC does not appear to have staged a kidnapping proves that she deliberately killed Caylee. As for the duct tape, we don't know when it was applied or why. The state will have to prove that it was applied when Caylee was alive in order to effect, or assist in ensuring, her death in order to use that evidence as proof of intentional murder.

 

[Nosey Parker]

Dirt residue on KC's shoes that were found in the car, matching dirt from the dumping ground. I know it doesn't prove she killed Caylee, but along with everything else, that should do it for the jury. I'm not sure we are ever going to have direct evidence that she killed her, only that she dumped the body.

 

[Tinsel]

I don't see how the fact that KC does not appear to have staged a kidnapping proves that she deliberately killed Caylee. As for the duct tape, we don't know when it was applied or why. The state will have to prove that it was applied when Caylee was alive in order to effect, or assist in ensuring, her death in order to use that evidence as proof of intentional murder.

This child was old enough to tell on her mother.

Is that not evidence enough that it was never intended to be removed?

Not to mention even trying to get it out of her hair or hiding the rash, if she was intended to live.

:chicken:

 

[Indianagirl]

I don't see how the fact that KC does not appear to have staged a kidnapping proves that she deliberately killed Caylee. As for the duct tape, we don't know when it was applied or why. The state will have to prove that it was applied when Caylee was alive in order to effect, or assist in ensuring, her death in order to use that evidence as proof of intentional murder.

Well whatever evidence was presented to the grand jury, was enough to charge KC with murder 1 and this was before the remains were found! The fact that they now have a body and a crime scene is a huge bonus for the prosecution.

 

[Devon]

This child was old enough to tell on her mother.

Is that not evidence enough that it was never intended to be removed?

Not to mention even trying to get it out of her hair or hiding the rash, if she was intended to live.

:chicken:

You are speculating that the tape was applied whilst Caylee was alive, but we don't know if that's the case or not.