2011.07.11 Greta Van Sustern interview with Jury Foreperson

[kgeaux]

I did not watch the interview as it is common knowledge that people like this are compensated for their appearences, (ABC 'news' rewarded one juror with an all expense paid vacation to Disney). I DID email the show, Fox News & the fox parent company to voice my opinion & ask for disclosure regarding compensation.

However - I read an article concerning the interview. He whined that it was the prosecution's fault.

Seems these **** 12 learned a valuable lesson from the killer; accept NO responsibility for your actions and point the finger at somebody ELSE.

How ironic is it that this iresponsible 12, in their overwhelming haste to return to their homes, rather than make the effort to do their job, find that 'returning home' as fast as possible has made it impossible for their lives to return to normal.

I myself have zero sympathy for these **** 12.
Blaming everybody else, JUST LIKE THE KILLER, makes sympathy impossible.

Honestly, if they did not believe the prosecution proved that Caylee was murdered and that Casey did it, IT IS the prosecution's fault. Assuming of course that Casey did murder Caylee.

Just using your post as a jumping off point, and not pointing any fingers at you: I think it is totally understandable why all the jurors would be frightened right now about their names becoming public knowledge. All the websleuth posters, no matter how angry and disappointed they are, seem to be controlling their anger. But out there in the real world, there are those who are threatening great bodily harm to these jurors.

I am a 59 year old high school drop out.

I listened to the jury instructions too and this is what I heard.

Blah,blah,blah, don't have to show HOW Caylee died or WHY she was killed.

Cute! The only caveat would be that the prosecution DID need to show she was murdered. That was their argument.

 

[yolorado]

What I seriously don’t get is how, HOW, the jury gave credence to the inuendos, etc. about George WITHOUT A SHRED OF EVIDENCE.
But there was truly a boatload of evidence AGAINST CASEY, and they didn’t weigh any of it. The discounted it all.
They gave more weight to Cindy’s testimony, George’s testimony and Krystal Holloway’s testimony than they did Dr. Vass, etc.
That just leads me to believe the scientific evidence was WAY WAY WAY over their heads. They glommed on to the soap opera portion of this case. SHAMEFUL.

You've nailed it completely. It's so frustrating that this jury seems to have stuck on Baez's opening and closing and the River Cruise statement about "snowballing" accidents which the judge told them specifically not to use in their decision, while missing the entire prosecution portion of the case. For all the talk and protestation that they couldn't base their decision on emotion, that appears to be exactly what they did. After the lightening strike, I'm moving on, but I will never get over this trial and verdict being a total miscarriage of justice. It has truly shaken my faith in my country in a way from which I may never recover. It's displaced the ground beneath my feet when it comes to truth, justice and the American way, especially with all these lawyers droning on that truth and justice aren't actually an important part of our system, not to mention Cheney Mason dripping with contempt for anyone who doesn't think this verdict is wonderful. I think maybe some lawyers may be more a part of the problem than the solution.

 

[MissJames]

To borrow a quote..." There's something wrong here"...The more I listen the more suspect I become. I hear confusion, a lack of understanding of evidence, a lack of understanding of Judge instructions, a huge lack of consideration of evidence all together...WoW

And to make it worse,they never asked for guidance or clarification . Did they even look at the instructions?

I get riled up,but remember HHJP would not just shrug his shoulders and say"oh well". If we suspect something,then he does ,too. I have to believe there will be some type of inquiry into what happened. It won't change the outcome but it's still worthy of investigation.

 

[Just Jayla]

I've been trying to not watch any tv coverage of the trial, the jurors, the talking heads..etc... Unfortunately last night I watched some of this interview...it was a BIG mistake...I'm STILL so angry!!!

You would thing George was on trial instead of the murderess ... they scrutinized everything george said.. but looked at NO evidence (of the piles and mountains ).. that pointed to the murderess Casey.

I didn't watch the whole interview.. i couldn't bear it. I believe someone posted that he thought Casey was a "nice person", "well spoken".. where did he get THAT from.. her jailhouse videos.. "just get me Tony's number".. you all are a huge waste... I can't "SHWALLOW"..

Its all so unbelieivable.. I feel like the world is upside down... and Greta just sits there and nods her head.. not even asking anything substantial.... seems like he pretty much ran the interview.. just like he probably railroaded the rest of the jury!!!

Ok.. lesson learned.. those jurors are NEVER going to say anything intelligent or make me think they did their jobs.. the more they talk.. the more ridiculous their thought process sounds...OMG... NO MORE CASEY ANTHONY TV COVERAGE FOR ME!!!!

BBM-THIS is why I cannot watch.

Moms told me that she saw AnnF speaking on some program about how they will just never know what happened to Caylee or who was involved...Then, as soon as Ann is off the screen, the talking heads begin to chime in about how Ann should know what happened because her co-counsel said what happened in his opening statement...My first question to mom was "Did they confront AF with this?"
Nope-They wait for AF to go off the air and then poke holes. Arrggghhhh!!! Would someone confront them on the spot?
I know none of them will ever do a show like O'Reilly or the like, where they know ahead of time they will be grilled-but it would be fantastic if they thought they were going on a softball show and someone surprised them. Oh well if they don't want to come back after that, who cares? What happened to getting (journalistic) answers about Caylee's justice?

 

[manatee]

Really??? I honestly thought nothing could force a do over. I remember someone...one of the TH's...saying that even if they proved tampering the lawyers could be punished/disbarred, but it still wouldn't cause a re-trial because it would "unfairly punish the defendant" for the actions of her lawyers.
(I am soooooooooo sorry, I cannot remember who I heard say this, maybe Sunny Hostin?)

I just did a quick search. but the verdict would be overturned.

http://wboy.com/story.cfm?func=viewstory&storyid=50546

http://www.hoeyfarina.com/railroadhfnotguiltyoverturned

 

[MissJames]

see this is what has me scratching my head. these jurors were mostly educated. nurses, teachers...something smells very JBish to me. I smell a rat. nothing that they've said makes any sense. smart people like these jurors appeared to be do not ignore all the evidence and certainly can add 2+2 and not get bamboozled by JB with his opening statement. I don't buy it. we need an investigation.

I do agree with the hinky aspect. Something is not right ,here : (

But.......my son has a chronic medical condition and we have known some not very bright nurses. While most teachers are very educated ,some duds slip through.It's a major controversy in the nation right now,but what are the odds that all 12 of jurors (have we heard from more than 1 alternate?) would not be smart enough to understand the experts testimony or the jury instructions :crazy:

I'm waiting for one of them to come forward and say "we screwed up and here's what happened" or " " I'm the new lawyer for juror # X ,who now has immunity,and here's what happened"

 

[MsMacGyver]

Has anyone here ever made a decision in their life and had that feeling in the pit of their stomach that was telling them that maybe they made a mistake or what they were doing was wrong? I know I have and it never turned out well. With age and experience I've learned to heed that little voice to guide me through the pitfalls. I wish the jurors would have stopped and thought, if this verdict doesn't feel right maybe we should slow down and revisit the evidence. I don't agree with the very small part of our society that feels the way to deal with the verdict is death threats to anyone or name calling. I do believe we all have the right to share our opinions...

 

[Psmith]

Link:

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2011/07/10/sneak-peek-the-anthony-trial-jury-foreman-speaks-out/

The first part of this interview is also discussed in the 2011.07.11 HLN News Coverage thread.

Link to 1st part of interview:

http://foxnewsinsider.com/2011/07/1...oreman-there-was-suspicion-of-george-anthony/

Greetings, all

I had a hard time finding anything but video excerpts or text snippets of the interview.

Here's a complete transcript:
http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-th...rensic-evidence-and-suspicions-george-anthony

(Sorry if duplicate.)

ETA: Just got to the end, and it looks like there is going to be more of the interview with Juror 11 aired tonight.....

 

[sherryk]

I watched a little of the interview.. then I questioned if he is getting paid so I no longer watched it.

Looked at is he was in a pretty nice location.. I wonder if he was the one who had a cruise coming up.

This was the member of the jury who is a teacher for 15 years.. I find it disturbing that he could not see that 1+1=2
He is a teached and could not understand the word reasonable doubt.
He said he didnt like to use the word.. dummped the body? (somthing to that extent) What would he call it then? He seemed to think GA was on trial.
I was sick of hearing the word "decomp".. sugar coating.. it was decomposing flesh of an innocent little girl.

I know some disagree but the jury just did NOT use commen sence... who in their right mind would as JA stated make an accident look like a murder...

Why in the world didnt they send a note and ask questions on exactly what reasonable doubt was and what were the exact rules.. they took it in their hands with little knowledge and I feel they DID NOT follow jury instructions. They thought they based on facts but if they had a "dislike" for GA they in fact based on emotions..

still I am sickened..

 

[fifteen89]

That is correct Goldenlover, however most of us believe that if one looks up "How to make chloroform" and subsequently chloroform is found in the trunk of this person's car (I think it is well established who looked up how to make chloroform), which many described as having an overpowering stench of human decomposition, and all of this is associated with a dead baby, I think most would reasonably conclude that this is quite incriminating. I submit that this is NOT something most of us would shrug off as this jury admittedly did.

^^^BBM^^^

And not just "associated with 'a dead baby' " -

>> a dead baby that just happened to be the daughter of the person who looked up 'how to make chloroform'

>> a dead baby that just happened to be the daughter of the person who lied to her family for 31 days about her and her daughter's whereabouts

>> a dead baby that just happened to be the daughter of the person who lied to her family for 31 days about her and her daughter's whereabouts who it was later shown through actual photos where this person was and what activities she was participating in - i.e. Fusion, hot body contests, renting movies, shopping for beer, bras, sunglasses etc with other people's money (not buying diapers, food or anything for the missing/'dead baby'), Bella Vita tattoo

>> a dead baby that just happened to be the daughter of the person who lied to her friends about having a smell of a dead squirrel in her car

>> a dead baby that just happened to be the daughter of the person who abandoned her car next to a smelly dumpster

>> a dead baby that just happened to be the daughter of the person who lied to LE and said she left her missing/'dead baby' off at an apt complex

>> a dead baby that just happened to be the daughter of the person who lied to LE and said she worked at Universal Studios and took them all the way down the hall to show them her 'office'

>> a dead baby that just happened to be the daughter of the person who lied and said the nanny of her missing/'dead baby' held her down (with the help of the nanny's sister) and kidnapped her missing/'dead baby' to teach her a lesson for being such a 'bad mother'

>> a dead baby that just happened to be the daughter of the person who lets her lawyer tell the court that her father sexually molested her since she was 8 years old and her brother tried to molest her

>> a dead baby that just happened to be the daughter of the person who sat in jail for 3 years awaiting trial for charges that could result in her being sentenced to death...........AND she waits for the opening statements of the trial to hear her lawyer say publicly for the first time that the 'dead baby' "accidentally drowned in the family pool" - coincidentally this 'accident' happened the last date the 'dead baby' was last seen alive

>> a dead baby that just happened to be the daughter of the person last seen with the 'dead baby' who was the only person proven to be in the location where the baby's remains were found on the very afternoon the Defense says the dead baby accidentally drowned.



I'm sure I'm missing plenty of other things that could be added to this list.


But what sinks in to the jurors is:
George is combative
George is evasive
George had an affair





ETA: Gee. What are the odds?

 

[Tiki]

It appears to me Greta is just trying to get the story and playing softball with the guy to keep him talking and maybe get other jurors on the show in the future.

Good, Bad, I don't know.

I'm way behind so I don't know if this has been mentioned, but, as a journalism student and instructor, I learned that normally these "high profile" interviews are scripted - that is, the questions are agreed upon beforehand. That's why we don't see those "hard-hitting" questions we all wish the interviewers would ask, and why the person being interviewed has the answers without having to think. Occasionally, a rogue question my be thrown into the mix, but I would venture to say that doesn't happen too often. I doubt these interviews were any different. Think about it - would you go on national TV and not know what you going to asked ahead of time?

,

 

[KathrynL]

Did he talk to the judge post-verdict? When was this? (from the transcript linked above) talking about the crime scene photos:

you know, take the notes that we needed to take on those pictures. And it was tough. You know, and I told the judge this.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-th...e-and-suspicions-george-anthony#ixzz1RucmsRqN

 

[LC446]

What about the cartoon from Ricardo in March, around the same time the computer search was made? Would that not make a reasonable person look up chloroform if they wanted to know what it was?

Yes, that makes sense if what was searched was chloroform, however the words searched were how+to+make+chloroform. Those exact words, it was in black and white. :banghead:

 

[lonetraveler]

I continue to ask one question. Who released the names of the jurors. We the general public do not have the names. Yet family members of juror number 3 were being called during sequestration.

So I continue to ask, who released the names? How are sequestered jurors lined up on the very next day with media? How can a trip to Disney for an extended family arranged so quickly?

Who got the names of these other jurors that are speaking? Something is wrong here. Why is the judge withholding the names from the general public when in fact these jurors are known to the media?

grandmaj, I served as a juror on a very controversial re-trial of a man on death row for rape and triple murder. The jurors names were not given out for thiry days following that trial, however shortly afterwards on a "Hardcopy" tv show I got to see a video of me walking out of the courtroom and walking to my car. Years later I was called to serve on a Grandjury for a year. A young father who was chosen by the judge to be the foreman asked the judge to be released from the grandjury because he was being contacted and threatened by people to "throw" the indictments. I was chosen by the judge to serve as foreperson for the last six months. An investigation was held on how the public (some of them the people who were supposedly secretly being investigated by the grandjury) got the names of the grandjury. I think that there is always a way to find out the names of those serving.

 

[chakti]

BBM-THIS is why I cannot watch.

Moms told me that she saw AnnF speaking on some program about how they will just never know what happened to Caylee or who was involved...Then, as soon as Ann is off the screen, the talking heads begin to chime in about how Ann should know what happened because her co-counsel said what happened in his opening statement...My first question to mom was "Did they confront AF with this?"
Nope-They wait for AF to go off the air and then poke holes. Arrggghhhh!!! Would someone confront them on the spot?
I know none of them will ever do a show like O'Reilly or the like, where they know ahead of time they will be grilled-but it would be fantastic if they thought they were going on a softball show and someone surprised them. Oh well if they don't want to come back after that, who cares? What happened to getting (journalistic) answers about Caylee's justice?

There are only three interviews I would be interested in watching.

Nancy Grace - John Morgan - O'Reilly ! Sadly not gonna happen.

 

[fifteen89]

What tells me something is that almost all of the defense's rebuttal witnesses ended up confirming the findings of the prosecution's forensic witnesses. At most, they would throw out a bizarre, ridiculous possibility like "the body could have been there for as little as two weeks even though roots were growing through the bones" or "the duct tape might have been placed on the skull after the body decomposed." But, every time, they would end up admitting that the prosecution's witness's testimony was valid. I don't think the jury understood what was being said -- not just the scientific stuff but also things like how Cindy was proven to be at work at the time she testified to be doing "chlorophyll" searches (which her computer somehow changed to "how to make chloroform.")

The prosecution had a theory of events based on Casey's behavior + forensic evidence. The defense had a "story" that had no basis in any evidence (they offered none) and were unable to successfully disprove any of the prosecution's evidence.

I can tell from your post Steadfast, that you would NOT have made it on this jury.

 

[denjet]

I watched a little of the interview.. then I questioned if he is getting paid so I no longer watched it.

Looked at is he was in a pretty nice location.. I wonder if he was the one who had a cruise coming up.

This was the member of the jury who is a teacher for 15 years.. I find it disturbing that he could not see that 1+1=2
He is a teached and could not understand the word reasonable doubt.
He said he didnt like to use the word.. dummped the body? (somthing to that extent) What would he call it then? He seemed to think GA was on trial.
I was sick of hearing the word "decomp".. sugar coating.. it was decomposing flesh of an innocent little girl.

I know some disagree but the jury just did NOT use commen sence... who in their right mind would as JA stated make an accident look like a murder...

Why in the world didnt they send a note and ask questions on exactly what reasonable doubt was and what were the exact rules.. they took it in their hands with little knowledge and I feel they DID NOT follow jury instructions. They thought they based on facts but if they had a "dislike" for GA they in fact based on emotions..

still I am sickened..

Umm ... isn't this juror in his early 30's ? If he went to college and graduated at 22 and has been teaching 15 years ... it puts him in his late 30's ...
This is best case if he didn't get his Masters ... hmmm :waitasec:

 

[Schu7]

Juror #11 says George has selective memory, thus was unbelievable. Heck probably guilty. Yet Cindy had massive selective memory all through the trial. He passes that off as medications being tired. But Cindy is just a non-entity in this event. So no damage done here. Hold on here. Cindy testified she was not on medications now. SEVERAL TIMES!

Juror #11 is ****. But there is 12 people on that juror. ALL 12 had to throw George under the bus. And believe Cindy's lies. Something is ever so wrong here. Simple stupidity does not come close to covering what has gone on here. Or simple greed of the jurors. But what is it?

 

[jrb0124]

Not "how+to+make+choloroform".

I've always been skeptical of the claim that someone typed that in.

You can Google something and have "suggested searches" tacked on, which when you click on them load another search page.

The URL of the typed in search page (with the serch terms linked with "+") is the same as a URL of the linked page.

For example I did a search for 'What is playdough'? and got this URL:

http://www.google.com/search?q=what+is+playdough&hl=en&sa=2

There was a link on the page that said 'make your own playdoh', and that URL is:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=make+your+own+playdoh

How do you tell the difference? There is no key logging utility or file native to Windows. Just because LDB said "someone typed it in" doesn't mean it happened.

Remember, the prosecution kept claiming "84 chloroform searches", before the defense got Stringer back up there and made him admit it was most likely 1 chloroform page access and 84 myspace accesses.

If you truly believe after all the testimony that there were 84 chloroform searches and no myspace accessess, that is unreasonable. The fact that the State knew about both reports and chose to ignore the realistic one and run with the tainted one was a big NO-NO, dumb, short-sighted, and called into question the credibility of all the computer forensics.

 

[wantsjustice]

So..the Jurors said: Awe Look at Casey, always smiling in photos with Caylee, and she is young and to pretty..Too pretty to have killed her daughter.

Didn't the Jurors notice that NO one who got on that stand looked towards Casey. No one seemed to look Casey's way to give her I am sorry that your daughter died accidentally. Not one did! No friends on the stand, no family member etc.. ( Cindy looked towards her one time and mouthed I love you. One time out of the numerous times she took the stand). Wouldn't that be a huge clue right there, that Casey isn't innocent.

And what about all the times the Trial was stopped.. Come on! Casey was the last one seen with Caylee.

They seem to want to blame George..But he told LE that the car smelled like there was a dead body in the car, and that he feared at that point it was either Casey or Caylee or both in the trunk.

The Jurors wanted to go home..They we're tired of being there, tired of being sequestered. I think the courts should re hear this case, as they did "NOT" do their job and take the time to go through the evidence. Time to change the laws because of this case.. New Case Law and exception to the Double Jeopardy Laws in Place to date.

They state it was 6-6 vote for manslaughter, but then that all fell through in just a few hours down to not guilty?

It took time to get decide who the foreman was going to be, it took time to organize thoughts of 12 people and there was time taken out for lunch etc..So that narrows their time down to just several hours to reach the verdict of not guilty. Come on.. No one asked to pull any evidence and or take the time to go through this decision carefully.

This Jury had requests.. They wanted to see the games, get news papers, special dinners etc etc etc, but they didn't want to discuss their opinions regarding this case more then 4-5 hours?

Somebody watched Run Away Jury to many times in that room, and somebody needs to be held accountable for not doing their civic duty to truly go through evidence in this case to reach their "True" verdict.

The Jury wanted and requested notepads for the Trial, and yet after Judge Perry stated: They could have them, but they would not be able to leave this courthouse. No one took notes.. maybe a scratch here and there by just a few of them, several even left them in the court room after the closing arguments..They didn't really want them.. They had to have discussed wanting them to ask the Judge for them...So what was their "True" motive behind those notepads?? To take notes for stories or book deals later??

Stealth Jurors?? Which one!!! And how many we're their??:waitasec: