2011.06.11 Sidebar (Trial Day Sixteen)

[MissJames]

I guess my next question,out of pure curiosity is,why discuss it here at all if you can only stick strictly to what is said at trial?
Much is said in court ,outside of the presence of the jury that I assume anyone watching or reading here is privy to.
The jury has been instructed not to discuss this with others,so how can anyone really consider themselves a juror,when they already know more and say more than the real jury?
IDK,it goes against my nature to not want all the info I can get,so it's like scratching an itch to me.
We salivated over potential document dumps and many of us stayed awake all night reading them. For almost 3 years we did this!

But that's what makes WS so interesting.....so many different kinds of people ,all looking for Justice for Caylee! Just doing it in different ways.

 

[Cheewawa007]

By the DT's own admission in their opening statement, they can link ICA to being present at the time of Caylee's death. For that reason alone, I do not think she will walk... she did not report the death to authorities and allowed the State of Florida to spend countless $ in searches, etc. Might not be able to prove she did it, but we know she was well aware of the fact her daughter was dead.

 

[Tipstaff]

It isn't up to the DT to prove it was an accidental drowning, nor that GA helped dispose of the body, abused ICA, or that Kronk stashed/staged the body. It IS up to the prosecution to PROVE beyond a reasonable doubt that ICA killed Caylee, and I don't believe they have done so with what they have so far presented. The burden of proof is on the prosecution, not on the defense. If I were a juror, with what I've seen/heard so far I would have to let ICA walk because they did NOT prove ICA did anything.

After watching the jail video's and the recent testimony of the experts this week I believe the PT has more than proved their case and could rest right now BUT do want to see how they will finish.

Yes, the DT will put on their case BUT after their opening statements and knowing that ICA sat in jail for 3 years for supposed accident and finding that not to be believed, all that remains for me is to give them the opportunity to state their case.

Sexual abuse by GA even if were proven does not give ICA the option to murder her child or abuse her corpse or continue the fraud on the taxpayers of Florida and the citizens of this country.

So many other people need the resources spent on this case. Hope you will reconsider after the DT presents their case.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

Incidentally Trident, if you haven't already done so, you might want to review the requirements of First Degree Murder under Florida law. Then look up the definition of Aggravated Child Abuse.

 

[wandering]

I have no idea. I don't recall any mention of that during the trial, though. And I've been listening from start to finish every day, except a few hours yesterday. You would think LE tested the shovel, but perhaps that showed nothing, so was no reason to mention it in court. I would think it easy to clean a shovel, though. The metal scoop part wouldn't absorb decomp, so simple bleach would probably do the trick.

JMO

They found nothing on the shovel. No bleach, etc. Also no fingerprints. I think she had gloves on when she handled it.

 

[Tuffy]

If you recall, Cindy said Casey was removing some bamboo, and that was why she needed the shovel. Now, if Casey wasn't around much the last couple of weeks, why would she work on bamboo in the yard?
I think she was planning on burying Caylee in the corner that the dogs hit on, but the ground wasn't digable, due to the bamboo, so she returned the shovel and went to plan B.
I agree with the rest of your scenario.

She wouldn't.

Nah, Cindy knew Casey was in trouble and was covering for her. She tried to make up a legitimate scenario where Casey would need to borrow a shovel. Just like Cindy made up the whole story of rotten pizza in Casey's trunk, long before we all found out that there was no pizza in the trunk at all.

The Anthonys tried to explain away any damning evidence before they even knew what was going on.

 

[Tipstaff]

I guess my next question,out of pure curiosity is,why discuss it here at all if you can only stick strictly to what is said at trial?
Much is said in court ,outside of the presence of the jury that I assume anyone watching or reading here is privy to.
The jury has been instructed not to discuss this with others,so how can anyone really consider themselves a juror,when they already know more and say more than the real jury?
IDK,it goes against my nature to not want all the info I can get,so it's like scratching an itch to me.
We salivated over potential document dumps and many of us stayed awake all night reading them. For almost 3 years we did this!

But that's what makes WS so interesting.....so many different kinds of people ,all looking for Justice for Caylee! Just doing it in different ways.

Would also like to add that the jurors and the defendant get to be in the same room and see and hear and feel and judge this trial. If we could simply assess situation and come to a decision via the internet or TV there would be no need for a courtroom. JMO

 

[Puzzler]

:angel2:

I believe that as one of the jurors you can look at the tape and picture for yourself if it is possible to NOT cover her mouth and nose. The jurors have this info to decide for themselves.

Doesn't have to cover the nose to kill. A crying child can suffocate on their own mucus if they can't open their mouths. (sorry for the image)

 

[Trident]

Think of Scott Peterson murdering Laci Peterson. The State didn't have her body or the baby for months and months and months. They had a boat, anchors he made and a girlfriend. SP is in San Quentin for life.

Yes, they had a boat Scott bought without telling anyone stored away until he needed it. Unfortunately, Scott went fishing, and was SEEN, fishing in the area were the bodies eventually washed up on shore. I believe there was also a hair caught on something in the boat, Scott had a girl friend, changed his appearance, and was headed toward Mexico with about $10,000 cash, plus camping equipment.

When someone testifies they saw ICA parked alongside the road where Caylee's body was found, in the right time frame, it would lend more weight. If Casey headed out of town, that would also lend more weight. From what I've seen so far, anyone could have killed Caylee and dumped her body like a piece of trash. I see no proof ICA did it, beyond a reasonable doubt. In fact, the longer this case goes on, the more I see how flimsy the evidence really is insofar as PROVING Casey was the one who killed her daughter.

Yeah, let me say it again, I think she did, but before I could convict her, I would need more evidence, circumstancial or otherwise, than what the prosecution has produced so far. They NEED to tie ICA more closely into this, make sure she is the only one who could have killed the baby. They haven't done it so far. You only need one juror like me to get her off and I do think she's guilty.

 

[Tipstaff]

Yes, they had a boat Scott bought without telling anyone stored away until he needed it. Unfortunately, Scott went fishing, and was SEEN, fishing in the area were the bodies eventually washed up on shore. I believe there was also a hair caught on something in the boat, Scott had a girl friend, changed his appearance, and was headed toward Mexico with about $10,000 cash, plus camping equipment.

When someone testifies they saw ICA parked alongside the road where Caylee's body was found, in the right time frame, it would lend more weight. If Casey headed out of town, that would also lend more weight. From what I've seen so far, anyone could have killed Caylee and dumped her body like a piece of trash. I see no proof ICA did it, beyond a reasonable doubt. In fact, the longer this case goes on, the more I see how flimsy the evidence really is insofar as PROVING Casey was the one who killed her daughter.

Yeah, let me say it again, I think she did, but before I could convict her, I would need more evidence, circumstancial or otherwise, than what the prosecution has produced so far. They NEED to tie ICA more closely into this, make sure she is the only one who could have killed the baby. They haven't done it so far. You only need one juror like me to get her off and I do think she's guilty.

Yep you are entitled to your opinion.

 

[Mountain_Kat]

I guess my next question,out of pure curiosity is,why discuss it here at all if you can only stick strictly to what is said at trial?
Much is said in court ,outside of the presence of the jury that I assume anyone watching or reading here is privy to.
The jury has been instructed not to discuss this with others,so how can anyone really consider themselves a juror,when they already know more and say more than the real jury?
IDK,it goes against my nature to not want all the info I can get,so it's like scratching an itch to me.
We salivated over potential document dumps and many of us stayed awake all night reading them. For almost 3 years we did this!

But that's what makes WS so interesting.....so many different kinds of people ,all looking for Justice for Caylee! Just doing it in different ways.

Not sure if this question is directed to me, Miss J, but I'll answer anyway. There's no way I can cut myself off from this case the way a real juror would be cut off. No need to even try, it would be impossible. I'd have to ban tv, radio, cover my eyes every time I passed a newspaper machine, cover my ears every time I went to the grocery store, not talk to neighbors or friends, etc. etc. This case is EVERYWHERE.

So, I try to do what I am able. I don't watch the news coverage if I can avoid it, definitely don't listen to any commentators, try not to listen to chit chat about the family having done this or that, etc. etc. I simply try to avoid anything that I haven't learned through testimony as a whole.

It's not a perfect scenario, I know...but it's as good as it's gonna get. My goal is just to offer WSers a glimpse into how this all MIGHT be playing out to a juror.

 

[Tuffy]

Yes, they had a boat Scott bought without telling anyone stored away until he needed it. Unfortunately, Scott went fishing, and was SEEN, fishing in the area were the bodies eventually washed up on shore. I believe there was also a hair caught on something in the boat, Scott had a girl friend, changed his appearance, and was headed toward Mexico with about $10,000 cash, plus camping equipment.

When someone testifies they saw ICA parked alongside the road where Caylee's body was found, in the right time frame, it would lend more weight. If Casey headed out of town, that would also lend more weight. From what I've seen so far, anyone could have killed Caylee and dumped her body like a piece of trash. I see no proof ICA did it, beyond a reasonable doubt. In fact, the longer this case goes on, the more I see how flimsy the evidence really is insofar as PROVING Casey was the one who killed her daughter.

Yeah, let me say it again, I think she did, but before I could convict her, I would need more evidence, circumstancial or otherwise, than what the prosecution has produced so far. They NEED to tie ICA more closely into this, make sure she is the only one who could have killed the baby. They haven't done it so far. You only need one juror like me to get her off and I do think she's guilty.

Would you be comfortable letting someone walk for this crime, even though you think they are guilty? The state will not present the evidence you are asking for, so you believe Casey should be sent free?

Sorry, if I'm dwelling on this, I am really taken aback by this. I've never heard this expressed this way, and I'm curious about your take on this.

 

[Trident]

From all the evidence and testimony you have seen over the 3 years do you think they have enough to prove to you she killed her?

No. I see the circumstantial evidence now, saw it then. It seems like a lot, but I don't see where it proves Casey killed Caylee.

Edited - They haven't tied Casey exclusively to Caylee's death. Hell, I don't even see where they have really TIED her to the death at all. Sure, it looks that way, but others, aside from Casey may have had equal access, not to mention some of the possible mistruths.

 

[Wise Old Owl]

Yes, they had a boat Scott bought without telling anyone stored away until he needed it. Unfortunately, Scott went fishing, and was SEEN, fishing in the area were the bodies eventually washed up on shore. I believe there was also a hair caught on something in the boat, Scott had a girl friend, changed his appearance, and was headed toward Mexico with about $10,000 cash, plus camping equipment.

When someone testifies they saw ICA parked alongside the road where Caylee's body was found, in the right time frame, it would lend more weight. If Casey headed out of town, that would also lend more weight. From what I've seen so far, anyone could have killed Caylee and dumped her body like a piece of trash. I see no proof ICA did it, beyond a reasonable doubt. In fact, the longer this case goes on, the more I see how flimsy the evidence really is insofar as PROVING Casey was the one who killed her daughter.

Yeah, let me say it again, I think she did, but before I could convict her, I would need more evidence, circumstancial or otherwise, than what the prosecution has produced so far. They NEED to tie ICA more closely into this, make sure she is the only one who could have killed the baby. They haven't done it so far. You only need one juror like me to get her off and I do think she's guilty.

Interesting. One question - how do you figure the car into this scenerio? Are you not accepting all the people (including the experts) who have testified to the smell (along with the hair, the K-9 alert, the stain)?

I've tried time and time again to re-think this crime excluding ICA as the guilty party. I just can't get past the car.

 

[Sabrina2011]

You don't need to prove she killed her (as in seeing her do it) You need to come to the conclusion this child died at her mothers hands and there is no other conclusion after reviewing all of the circumstantial evidence.

The defense opened and immediately placed the dead body in front of her mother. And we know George did not do it. She drove around with a decomposing body in her trunk.. Then threw that in the woods. I wonder how some people get through life, I suppose they need to block out the obvious when it is ugly to protect themselves

 

[Mountain_Kat]

No. I see the circumstantial evidence now, saw it then. It seems like a lot, but I don't see where it proves Casey killed Caylee.

You are not convinced that Caylee's decomposing body was ever in the trunk of ICA's car?

 

[Cheewawa007]

Do you think the jury will feel they've been punked once the trial is over & they are able to view ICA's behavior prior to them (the jury) entering the courtroom and after they leave?

 

[wandering]

I still think that GA either saw Caylee in the trunk that day (gas can incident) or caught ICA when she was trying to bury her in the yard. I'm feel certain he told her he was having no part of it but would not tell her mother (which he didn't do until much later) or the cops. I think the drowing story came from ICA telling this to her father. What daughter would admit to her father that she killed her child???

Afterwards, ICA dumped first the body and then the car. I don't feel GA had anything to do with this but I firmly believe that he knew.

JMO

George told the cops that Casey wouldn't let him go to her trunk, she insisted on getting the wheel blocks herself, and at the same time, threw out the gas cans and said "here's your damn cans.."
(paraphrasing). He never looked in the trunk, and why would he?

 

[momtective]

This appears to be a deliberate hand gesture as opposed to a subconscious use of her fingers to wipe tears. She does this when Investigator Welch described where Caylee's skull was found, while LDB is questioning her. It looks like it was intentional towards LDB or the witness, or both. She appears to be angry that she is even having to sit and hear all this ... Caylee was NEVER intended to be found - IMO.

Notice that the Inmate does not duplicate this finger gesture when she has her unguarded meltdown on May 28th when Cindy left the stand and then hugged George. She wipes tears and never uses the "F.U." finger once.

http://www.wftv.com/video/28058178/index.html
RAW VIDEO: Angry Casey Cries As Mom...

Someone please send this to HHJP and to the media...I can see the headlines now "Is Casey Anthony giving everyone the finger?" Seriously, HHJP needs to see this and he also needs to put a stop to her public display of emotion...if everyone else has to follow the rules, so does she. I also think she needs to be forced to look at all of the pictures, this is the result of her actions and she needs to be forced to look at it.:banghead:

 

[katsclown]

This is Judge Ito's definition of reasonable doubt, as given to OJ's jury.

Reasonable doubt is defined as follows. It is not a mere possible doubt, because everything relating to human affairs is open to some possible or imaginary doubt. It is that state of the case which, after the entire comparison and consideration of all the evidence, leaves the minds of the jurors in that condition that they cannot say they feel an abiding conviction of the truth of the charge.