2011.07.26-28 HLN & FOX (Weekly) News Coverage - Caylee Anthony

[cluciano63]

http://www.facebook.com/NancyGraceHLN

Nancy Grace

Outrage: report just in: Tot Mom Casey Anthony says she will only talk for $1.5 million or more! What do you think? Call Nancy Grace tonight, tell us how you feel!

How I feel is, unless you have something NEW, Nancy...move on...

 

[logicalgirl]

Just another Casey embellishment IMO. She got the name from somewhere...and I do believe it could very well have been this woman-ZG.

FKC had every opportunity to look at ZG picture and tell everyone she was not Zanny but she refused to do that. So up the creek she went.....

 

[logicalgirl]

Just another Casey embellishment IMO. She got the name from somewhere...and I do believe it could very well have been this woman-ZG.

And just of course yet a complete coinkydink that this woman driving a white car with NY plates filled out an app to look at the apartment at the Sawgrass apartments a couple of weeks before that...

 

[logicalgirl]

Here's a wonderful (but quite long) article just posted a while ago in Today's News Discussion that is well worth the read, and it will make you feel a whole lot better than listening or thinking about Jean C.

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202508318214&Reasonable_doubts_in_the_Casey_Anthony_trial&slreturn=1&hbxlogin=1
Adam H. Kurland - The National Law Journal - July 26, 2011
"When you have excluded the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." — Sherlock Holmes

Worth getting through even if it is about points of law - he makes some very interesting observations...for a Law Professor....

Hmm, that quote didn't work very well - someone just say if I need to redo it.

 

[logicalgirl]

He became a legal analyst for WESH during CFCA's trial.

And not a very good one AT ALL :waitasec:- very Defense leaning. Thank heavens for Bill S. or I would never have had verified what I believed I watched every day at the trial.

 

[logicalgirl]

The show was Nancy Grace last night but the other lady Jean was doing the show for her. The Zenaida Gonzales's attorney was on the show and he said her middle name wasn't Fernando. Jean ask him if he thought it would be a problem and ofcourse he said no, (he wants his 15 minutes of fame, to get his name known) She disagreed last night that it wouldn't make a difference.



This Zenaida Gonzales was cleared very fast.
This Zenaida has Tatoo's.
This Zenaida's middle name isn't Fernando.
This Zenaida children didn't fit the description.

I don't remenber what else, but anybody can file a civil suit.
If it would have been me and I was cleared I would have gone about my life. I still don't get the being fired, most replacable places would make sure you were guilty of something before they fire you. She must have been an AT-WILL employee. They can fire you if the don't like your looks, I've been told.
I may be wrong but I think this suit is a long shot.
She will have to prove it's her and only her and only her that Casey was talking about. The very first thing that will come out is the name is wrong.
If somebody sues you the name has to be correct. (Even if it for credit cards not paid)
JMOO

Uh....hello Jean? The SA and the LE cleared her very fast. What did not happen is FKC did not look at ZFG's picture and deny this was "the Nanny" and neither did Baez. her defense attorney.......nor did either of them make a public statement or a statement to the SA denying this was her.

If anything Baez encouraged Rosebud to keep fanning the flames....

 

[froginTtown]

Do any members remember the video of the media being interviewed..??
and it closed with Bill Shaefer talking.... If someone could provide that link I would truely appreciate it.... I love his rant at the end, and speaks of exactly how I feel.....
TIA....

 

[Sustained]

Here's a wonderful (but quite long) article just posted a while ago in Today's News Discussion that is well worth the read, and it will make you feel a whole lot better than listening or thinking about Jean C.

Thanks logicalgirl, a great read that I think illustrates in an eloquent fashion, the key points all of us verdict opponents have tried to convey ....

My favorite paragraph ...

The Anthony trial was an intricate circumstantial evidence case, but it shouldn't have flummoxed a jury of even borderline intelligence. Why did these jurors so lack the courage of their convictions (literally) that they were not willing to fight for their convictions for even one full calendar day? It seems to me that the jurors collectively certainly did not carefully evaluate the evidence in the manner that this circumstantial evidence required — when such careful examination could have resulted in a guilty verdict. None of the reported comments of the several jurors who have communicated, in one form or another, has said anything that inspires confidence that they knew what they were talking about, understood the difference between inferences that could be drawn from evidence as opposed to mere speculation or properly understood what the prosecution was required to prove.

 

[logicalgirl]

Do any members remember the video of the media being interviewed..??
and it closed with Bill Shaefer talking.... If someone could provide that link I would truely appreciate it.... I love his rant at the end, and speaks of exactly how I feel.....
TIA....

Yes, here it is - just for you!

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/video...scussion-panel

Hope that works - it is up in the media links on Todays News Discussion - on the 15th. The First link doesn't work, but the one posted by A_News_Junkie just underneath it does...


__________________

 

[logicalgirl]

Thanks logicalgirl, a great read that I think illustrates in an eloquent fashion, the key points all of us verdict opponents have tried to convey ....

My favorite paragraph ...

The Anthony trial was an intricate circumstantial evidence case, but it shouldn't have flummoxed a jury of even borderline intelligence. Why did these jurors so lack the courage of their convictions (literally) that they were not willing to fight for their convictions for even one full calendar day? It seems to me that the jurors collectively certainly did not carefully evaluate the evidence in the manner that this circumstantial evidence required — when such careful examination could have resulted in a guilty verdict. None of the reported comments of the several jurors who have communicated, in one form or another, has said anything that inspires confidence that they knew what they were talking about, understood the difference between inferences that could be drawn from evidence as opposed to mere speculation or properly understood what the prosecution was required to prove.

Isn't it great? Loved that first line! I was so happy to see it posted. We discuss the silliest details here as being important when of course that's exactly what the DT wanted to have happen, while the facts are screaming at us.

 

[3doglady]

Thanks logicalgirl, a great read that I think illustrates in an eloquent fashion, the key points all of us verdict opponents have tried to convey ....

My favorite paragraph ...

The Anthony trial was an intricate circumstantial evidence case, but it shouldn't have flummoxed a jury of even borderline intelligence. Why did these jurors so lack the courage of their convictions (literally) that they were not willing to fight for their convictions for even one full calendar day? It seems to me that the jurors collectively certainly did not carefully evaluate the evidence in the manner that this circumstantial evidence required — when such careful examination could have resulted in a guilty verdict. None of the reported comments of the several jurors who have communicated, in one form or another, has said anything that inspires confidence that they knew what they were talking about, understood the difference between inferences that could be drawn from evidence as opposed to mere speculation or properly understood what the prosecution was required to prove.

So well said.

 

[Cherry Ames]

From the National Law Journal Article: "The point is not that every rational person had to conclude that everything happened the way the government theorized. The point was that one juror should have had the backbone to stand firm and require the necessary mosaic-like inquiry."


Still waiting for those jury names to be released....how are those lucrative deals doing, guys?

 

[Thinker Belle]

Still waiting for those jury names to be released....how are those lucrative deals doing, guys?

I got an alert today to my phone that Judge Perry has ruled the jurors names will not be released until at least October 25

 

[Thinker Belle]

<snipped>The Kelley Blue Book lists the normal value on a used Sunfire at about $3,000, but Lipman said it could go to a collector for more than that. The money would be donated to the new foundation the Anthonys are establishing in memory of Caylee Anthony.

"I've had multiple offers to purchase it, but George and Cindy do not want to profit off it by any means," Lippman told WESH

Read more: http://www.wesh.com/casey-anthony-extended-coverage/28672924/detail.html#ixzz1TFuupVfU


OK, this makes me physically ill. So they want to donate the money to charity? That's lovely and all but that is disgusting that someone actually wants to buy a car that IMO served as a coffin for a 2 year old child as a collector's item. That is just plain sick and disturbing..

 

[kidz110]

<snipped>The Kelley Blue Book lists the normal value on a used Sunfire at about $3,000, but Lipman said it could go to a collector for more than that. The money would be donated to the new foundation the Anthonys are establishing in memory of Caylee Anthony.

"I've had multiple offers to purchase it, but George and Cindy do not want to profit off it by any means," Lippman told WESH

Read more: http://www.wesh.com/casey-anthony-extended-coverage/28672924/detail.html#ixzz1TFuupVfU


OK, this makes me physically ill. So they want to donate the money to charity? That's lovely and all but that is disgusting that someone actually wants to buy a car that IMO served as a coffin for a 2 year old child as a collector's item. That is just plain sick and disturbing..

BBM Not a charity--their foundation double :sick: :sick:

 

[jon_burrows]

<snipped>The Kelley Blue Book lists the normal value on a used Sunfire at about $3,000, but Lipman said it could go to a collector for more than that. The money would be donated to the new foundation the Anthonys are establishing in memory of Caylee Anthony.

"I've had multiple offers to purchase it, but George and Cindy do not want to profit off it by any means," Lippman told WESH

Read more: http://www.wesh.com/casey-anthony-extended-coverage/28672924/detail.html#ixzz1TFuupVfU


OK, this makes me physically ill. So they want to donate the money to charity? That's lovely and all but that is disgusting that someone actually wants to buy a car that IMO served as a coffin for a 2 year old child as a collector's item. That is just plain sick and disturbing..

BBM - Oh please Lippman, that ship has sailed. George and Cindy do not want to profit. :floorlaugh:

Why do the As still need a mouthpiece, I mean lawyer to make announcements all the time?

IMO

 

[Wendy101]

:maddening:Sick. wonder if they will put her Winnie the Pooh blanket up for auction? Maybe they can sell some of her ashes too while they are at it? Maybe they have a piece of her first hair cut...they can auction that off too..... Oh - I forgot, they don't want to profit... the money can go the their foundation!

OMG! They make me totally sick! I am not so sure who is sicker - Casey or her parents.:banghead:

 

[suzihawk]

From the National Law Journal Article: "The point is not that every rational person had to conclude that everything happened the way the government theorized. The point was that one juror should have had the backbone to stand firm and require the necessary mosaic-like inquiry."


Still waiting for those jury names to be released....how are those lucrative deals doing, guys?

One thing that stood out to me in the article about HHJP not releasing the names until October...

"Eckstadt said fellow jurors have said they don't want each other talking to the media."

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...-jury-names-released-20110726,0,5310429.story

I can't help but wonder why they would feel the need to make this decision or agreement as a group. Why the need to discuss it at all, actually? Why not leave that up to each individual? Then, of course, there were those that apparently broke ranks and talked anyway. Makes me feel very suspicious.

 

[Whisperer]

Here's a wonderful (but quite long) article just posted a while ago in Today's News Discussion that is well worth the read, and it will make you feel a whole lot better than listening or thinking about Jean C.

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202508318214&Reasonable_doubts_in_the_Casey_Anthony_trial&slreturn=1&hbxlogin=1
Adam H. Kurland - The National Law Journal - July 26, 2011
"When you have excluded the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." &#8212; Sherlock Holmes

Worth getting through even if it is about points of law - he makes some very interesting observations...for a Law Professor....

Hmm, that quote didn't work very well - someone just say if I need to redo it.

:clap:
Fantastic and well written article. Thank you Okiedokietoo and logicgal.

 

[karen in New York]

Do any members remember the video of the media being interviewed..??
and it closed with Bill Shaefer talking.... If someone could provide that link I would truely appreciate it.... I love his rant at the end, and speaks of exactly how I feel.....
TIA....

WFTV 's website had all the interviews on video but haven't been there in a week or more ...