2011.07.11 Greta Van Sustern interview with Jury Foreperson

[Kat]

Meh on the bro in the FBI. Or did he use his brother's profession to support a statement he had made?

One of my recently discovered pet peeves are people that support their stance or statement about something by stating a relatives profession or accomplishments.

Example: My dad is LE. Therefore, I know what I'm talking about because my dad did 30 years on the police force.

My mom was a lawyer. Therefore my opinion means more because she was a lawyer for pete's sake.

Oh and my favorite: My Husband is a NCO or an officer. Therefore----yada yada yada even though they never put their feet in a pair of combat boots in their life.

(sorry had to vent )

 

[manatee]

He is a PE teacher and working on his masters degree for special education.

master degree for special education? :waitasec:
I don't want to get a TO....sitting on my hands :floorlaugh:

 

[rbrnmw2]

:waitasec: how does that profession make him experienced in observing people in regard to if they are telling the truth or not?

Or am I confusing this juror with another one that might have implied that they could do that?

no he said it

he equates catching teens in fibs about why they forgot their gym clothes to being a full blown body language extraordinaire

 

[Boytwnmom]

come one, that's, like, medical stuff and boring and confusing and...let's talk about how George murdered Caylee and how we're here to indict or convict or whatever on "cause of death"...

None of them have considered the evidence of the mandible being in place as indication of the skull not being moved. They did not consider the mandible being in place as evidence for the duct tape covering the mouth either.

 

[MustlyLurking]

None of them have considered the evidence of the mandible being in place as indication of the skull not being moved. They did not consider the mandible being in place as evidence for the duct tape covering the mouth either.

It seems as though the jury did not consider any of the evidence or testimony.

 

[Kat]

Getting any degree in teaching special education is commendable. Can't fault him on that. JMHO

 

[Dr.Fessel]

That juror tells the same kind of lies Casey and Cindy do. Ask a simple yes and no question and it is blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, yes, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, no, blah, blah, blah.

 

[Phoebeb]

BOR is quite infuriated about the verdict, but you can tell by what he has said that he did not follow the case closely. If he wants to get to the bottom of what went wrong here, BOR will need to give each member of the jury an IQ test. That could explain a few things. As far as tampering, we can only hope...

Oh yeah, he is disgusted. He may not know the details we do, but he knows what he knows just like my dad did. As soon as my dad heard she didn't say anything for 31 days, that's all he needed. He said, "She's guilty." I think Bill is the same way. Just logical.

 

[mikeysmommom]

I wonder what 11's FBI brother would have to say about 12 or 15 people who believe ICA should be convicted for lying, but then they totally believe the story? He must be a little less than proud of 11.

I hope he slugged him:innocent:

 

[SyraKelly]

Meh on the bro in the FBI. Or did he use his brother's profession to support a statement he had made?

One of my recently discovered pet peeves are people that support their stance or statement about something by stating a relatives profession or accomplishments.

Example: My dad is LE. Therefore, I know what I'm talking about because my dad did 30 years on the police force.

My mom was a lawyer. Therefore my opinion means more because she was a lawyer for pete's sake.

Oh and my favorite: My Husband is a NCO or an officer. Therefore----yada yada yada even though they never put their feet in a pair of combat boots in their life.

(sorry had to vent )

I think that is what he did with this jury,he went in there and said my brother is an FBI agent,so I know the law let me be foreman and they all said OK!!

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Exactly They did not compensate for the interview. They compensated him for something else so he would do the interview. Just like ABC. Did you see JF's photo on their website? We know for a fact that ABC pays "licensing fees" for photos.

They were at a nice hotel on the beach. I'm sure a room there was part of the compensation.

Can't even trust Greta now. sigh. (I thought she did a good interview though.)

 

[denjet]

I wonder what 11's FBI brother would have to say about 12 or 15 people who believe ICA should be convicted for lying, but then they totally believe the story? He must be a little less than proud of 11.

Probably told him not to quit his day job !

 

[Phoebeb]

It seems as though the jury did not consider any of the evidence or testimony.

I'd love to see some interviewer actually quiz them on the facts.

 

[Kat]

I think that is what he did with this jury,he went in there and said my brother is an FBI agent,so I know the law let me be foreman and they all said OK!!

Off topic but I have started to respond in this way when someone what I described as my pet peeve above:

Well bless your heart! I bet that was hard (or wonderful) because.....

Blah blah blah, completely redirect them until I can walk away

 

[Dr.Fessel]

Getting any degree in teaching special education is commendable. Can't fault him on that. JMHO

I just question his motivation for getting it, after all he is willing to ignore all evidence and turn a child killer loose among his future special education kids.

 

[mikeysmommom]

I will be watching. Sorry, I can't help it. I have to see for myself after examining her for 3 years. What will really tick me off would be if Katie C throws herself a bunch of softball questions. If she has any limitations on her questions, I will not watch. I want some hard * questions asked with zero pussy-footing and coddling! Grr. I'm already getting mad!

If ICA gets paid, that's okay, she has plenty of lawsuits she'll be paying off. She'll blow through that money in no time. I think eventually she should hook up with Charlie Sheen, anyway. They're both such misunderstood winners!

IF you must watch it,please come here and share so none of us have too:floorlaugh:It will help kill the ratings numbers:floorlaugh:

 

[rbrnmw2]

I'd love to see some interviewer actually quiz them on the facts.

Yeah me too I noticed Nancy Grace hasn't interviewed any of them yet

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

Chiming on that I was unimpressed with this juror, especially as foreman. He didn't appear to understand the issues of the decisions very well. He kept on harping on needing "cause of death" to convict. That's obviously wrong. The defense apparently were effective in confusing all the issues and confusing them on reasonable doubt. If the jurors were competent and smart, it shouldn't have worked. Perhaps the state should have given a greater emphasis to explaining reasonable doubt and their options

The juror was also confused about the evidence, for example, the smell in the trunk. Too me, I thought that was the best proven incriminating fact in the case. There was a dead body in that trunk. Otherwise, so many people wouldn't have said it smelled like it; even Casey did.

 

[Phoebeb]

IF you must watch it,please come here and share so none of us have too:floorlaugh:It will help kill the ratings numbers:floorlaugh:

You got it! I must, but for those who must not, I will gladly give the details if you want.

 

[Nefriahaia]

I just question his motivation for getting it, after all he is willing to ignore all evidence and turn a child killer loose among his future special education kids.

:toastred: