2011.07.11 Greta Van Sustern interview with Jury Foreperson

[SyraKelly]

Last night Greta asked if punishment was considered during deliberations. At first he said no. Then he said:
"The punishment is written on the paper, the verdict. The extent of the outcome of what could happen (DP) weighed on you-it hit you at times. "

I just asked AZ if punishment was listed on the verdict. This is her answer:

"No, the jury is not told the range of possible sentences for each charge. "

If the punishment is not written on the verdict form..then is not telling truth,what else is he NOT TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT!After reading that post I will never believe anything that come out of his interviews-why lie about something that get be checked on!!I don't get it!!

 

[KathrynL]

I'm assuming no one told them because they were not supposed to consider punishment during the guilt phase. Just whether she was guilty of each charge. They would have been instructed on LWOP or DP during the punishment phase of the trial had she been found guilty.

But what reasonably informed person thinks manslaughter or even 2nd degree murder carries the death penalty?

 

[SAgal]

If the punishment is not written on the verdict form..then is not telling truth,what else is he NOT TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT!After reading that post I will never believe anything that come out of his interviews-why lie about something that get be checked on!!I don't get it!!

This Juror #11...the Jury Foreman simply lied about this issue.

Someone posted that this guy, Juror 11, was not paid for his interview with Greta. How does the public know/verify if Juror #11 was paid for his interview, or not?

 

[Cross Creek]

What was it about juror #3 going to Disney World??

 

[KathrynL]

If the punishment is not written on the verdict form..then is not telling truth,what else is he NOT TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT!After reading that post I will never believe anything that come out of his interviews-why lie about something that get be checked on!!I don't get it!!

This whole punishment/DP argument has to be dishonesty on #3&11's part. Why would they or anyone think that manslaughter or anything under first degree or felony murder carry the death penalty. I can't believe anyone is that <unusual>. The SA did not go for "all or nothing" because lessers were included in every count. But the jury acts as though that is what it was. I just can't buy that they actually believed that.

 

[HatesSociopaths]

These jurors were put into a situation way way above their pay grade. These were simple village idiots who thought they were watching a murder movie where moviegoers whisper &#8220;ohhhhh so is it him !!!!!!!!!!!&#8221; throughout the movie until miraculously at the end the actual murderer is revealed through a magically found video tape or picture or eyewitness. Instead of looking at glaring facts like obvious cover-ups and blatant lies of the defendant, they thought they were supposed to look for nuances in body language and emotional state of the witnesses that could reveal their reliability and cast doubt, any doubt, on the story the prosecution was presenting. Instead of examining the facts, these jurors saw a pretty young mother and had a hard time stomaching the cold, hard truth. The foreman got swept away in the male/female yin and yang and was seduced by Casey. He got manipulated by her, just the latest in a long line of fools. The DT saw these folks for what they were (Pinellas county bumpkins) and spun a story of such breathtaking fantasy that completely blew away these mouthbreathers. Juror# 14 has stated that he certainly believed George knew about it all. So full points to defense, they outplayed the prosecution by correctly guessing the jurors mental abilities. I am sure defense attorneys are taking notes everywhere. First guess just how dumb the jury is, then spin a yarn so huge, so unbelievably fantastic that some of it is likely to stick to the jurors. Go all out and blame everyone and everything, distract, deflect and confuse the jury away from the real defendant. Put doubts about everything and everyone in the case so that it will take a jury with an average IQ to sort it all out and make any meaningful decision. The more confusion in the case, the harder it is mentally to sort out truth from fiction, the more unlikely that a jury will be mentally capable to even engage in such an uncomfortable, monumental task, and end result, acquittal through not-guilty. Ultimately the foreman led this group right into his egotistical, narcisssist way of thinking that missed the forest for the trees, and ignored the EVIL elephant in the room. He got her off. And I'm still pissed off about it and wonder when I will be able to be at peace with this. He has affected the faith in justice for a whole country. And the other jurors failed to have a spine and say hell no.

:banghead:

 

[Nova24]

What was it about juror #3 going to Disney World??

She got a free trip there with her family. No kidding.

 

[Nova24]

I apologize if these have been posted - haven't "caught up" on thread!

MarkNeJame Mark NeJame
Press conference tomorrow my office announcing proposed new law so FL. jurors can't profit from serviceThx Rep. Scott Randolph #caseyanthony


MarkNeJame Mark NeJame
It also makes it a felony to offer to pay for info from jurors or to approach for pay.This will make them responsible as well. #caseyanthony

Can you start a thread on this? It deserves it's own topic. I'm THRILLED to read it.

 

[SyraKelly]

i have a tear rolling dowm my face. i have tried to stay away from jury interviews. hearing what has been said is shocking and deeply depressing. who the heck is the foreman to say publicly that GA could have MURDERED caylee. even the DT did not lead them down that path. how is it ok to just pull an unsubstansiated theory about a persons guilt who isnt on trial and wasnt charged with a crime. although i had a feeling GA wasnt sitting well with the jury during his testimony i never thought they would accuse him of murder. (all three, we didnt know????)
i feel so helpless hearing this and scared for any person accused of a crime if this is how decisions are made. i wish the someone with a voice was truly listening to these statements and would step in and do something unpresidented such as override their verdit based on ignorance of their duties (just a fantasy) i dont support death threats and harassment but i can certaintely see why people would want to shun these people for playing a dangerous game with the nations faith in the system. these 12 people have destroyed my sense of trust and in our system. the fact that no one is stepping in and at the very least challenging their words during the interviews and bring their inconsistancies out for their reflection to comment on is stunning. no one has he right to tell me to respect this verdict. in fact i want to be told publicly that these people made a grave error in how they came to their decision and i want it explained why so that it opens up peoples eyes. its one thing to have darn good reasons for aquitting someone based on the law. its another for jennifer ford and foreman to tell me thry followed they letter of the law while spewing total mistruths from the trial. again..who told them it was their duty to determine if GA was a murderer? did the foreman plant this seed? i thought this was about caseys role in her daughters disappearance. casey had 3 years to work with the SAO or LE to bring GA to justice if she had evidence of a crime or even a story to tell. i dont use the word ignorant lightly but in this case so far it fits. and if by chance the other jury members have a different story to sell about being coerced then i can call them weak for not standing up for Caylee. wow how did you guys get thru the day after hearing that? i can no longer appreciate a jury support thread and that makes me sad (not knocking anyone who supports them) i tried to respect them for giving their time but i no longer feel the ones who have spoke are worthy of my support. shouldnt GA have been innocent until PROVEN guilty in their mock trial delibertions of HIM instead of casey. my goodness the DT never said GA did anything with Caylee's body. the just left it hanging with "we will never know" how did they connect those dots? sorry rant over. its their decision and i understand that but it bothers me what is being used as excuses.

I vote this post of the day--EXCELLENT THANK YOU!

 

[STEADFAST]

This whole punishment/DP argument has to be dishonesty on #3&11's part. Why would they or anyone think that manslaughter or anything under first degree or felony murder carry the death penalty. I can't believe anyone is that <unusual>. The SA did not go for "all or nothing" because lessers were included in every count. But the jury acts as though that is what it was. I just can't buy that they actually believed that.

I agree with your post. But I just want to point out that the State's Attorneys did not "go for" anything at all as far as the charges were concerned. A 19-member grand jury indicted Casey on the charges.

 

[shgrbkr]

I'm so appalled at the verdict and that the jurors blatantly report that they considered several things that were NOT evidence and the judge even instructed them to not consider...yet they did anyway. I am boycotting all interviews...mainly for self-preservation to keep from getting sick. I hope Mark Nejame gets this non-profiting law passed.

 

[SyraKelly]

Has any of these jurors EVER said CAYLEE'S name?

 

[Nova]

i have a tear rolling dowm my face. i have tried to stay away from jury interviews. hearing what has been said is shocking and deeply depressing. who the heck is the foreman to say publicly that GA could have MURDERED caylee. even the DT did not lead them down that path. how is it ok to just pull an unsubstansiated theory about a persons guilt who isnt on trial and wasnt charged with a crime....

I am utterly baffled by all the suspicion focused on GA. I found him entirely trustworthy; even his moments of defensiveness made perfect sense to me given that he had to testify under the shadow of horrible accusations.

But the jury is the "trier of fact" and it is entirely within their purview to ignore all theories presented by both sides and interpret the evidence in a novel way.

 

[Nova24]

Has any of these jurors EVER said CAYLEE'S name?

That's actually a really good point. I know #11 didn't want to say she was "dumped" despite that actually happening.

 

[Nova]

If the punishment is not written on the verdict form..then is not telling truth,what else is he NOT TELLING THE TRUTH ABOUT!After reading that post I will never believe anything that come out of his interviews-why lie about something that get be checked on!!I don't get it!!

If it makes no sense that he is lying, probably he isn't. Why jump to that conclusion?

He made a mistake. A stupid one, maybe, but just a mistake.

 

[crucibelle]

I apologize if these have been posted - haven't "caught up" on thread!

MarkNeJame Mark NeJame
Press conference tomorrow my office announcing proposed new law so FL. jurors can't profit from serviceThx Rep. Scott Randolph #caseyanthony


MarkNeJame Mark NeJame
It also makes it a felony to offer to pay for info from jurors or to approach for pay.This will make them responsible as well. #caseyanthony

Good news!

 

[SyraKelly]

If it makes no sense that he is lying, probably he isn't. Why jump to that conclusion?

He made a mistake. A stupid one, maybe, but just a mistake.

He did say the punishment is on the verdict form and its not..they ask in the legal thread and was told no its not..so why did he say it was there?

 

[KathrynL]

I agree with your post. But I just want to point out that the State's Attorneys did not "go for" anything at all as far as the charges were concerned. A 19-member grand jury indicted Casey on the charges.

The main charges were in the indictment, but it is my understanding that there were lesser included charges for each count, and I believe it is the SA that decides if they will offer lesser included charges to give the jury more options.
Hope I said that so it makes sense. imo & thanks for your response.
:seeya:

 

[Cross Creek]

She got a free trip there with her family. No kidding.

Thanks! Who gave it to her?

 

[grandmaj]

Someone please explain to me why she would have that impression. Was it so basic to the lawyers and the judge that only the top counts were the DP that no one spelled it out for these jurors? I just understood that hearing the indictment being read, I knew the meaning of lesser charges and the lesser included charges. Could they be so uninformed that they didn't get it? Or, just disingenuous - which is what I'm thinking. I mean really. :loser:

Before they made that assumption perhaps they might have asked the judge a question? If indeed this is true of all jurors not just this one?????