cecybeans
Active Member
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2008
- Messages
- 2,319
- Reaction score
- 3
I don't think they will have any problem reaching the level needed for conviction either.
The jury can get there one of two ways:
A piece of evidence presented that just cannot be explained away, this can be different pieces for different jury members. In this case I would expect it to be Casey's fingerprints embedded in the duct tape and fibers from her trunk embedded in the same tape.
Or they can get there by the totality of the evidence. Yes you can attack each individual piece, challenge the validity of a test, try to impeach each individual witness.... but the Prosecution has a lot of pieces for a REASONABLE juror to go back into that room and dismiss them all.
Not to mention there is no explanation that can be made that explains all of that evidence away by pointing to a nanny.
That being said I think the best reasonable doubt arguement they could create is that Cindy did this and Casey has had a mental breakdown since. I don't think they are going to go that route though.
impatient - once again we are synchronized swimmers. Circumstantial evidence is meant to be constructed and perceived as a totality and no realistic possibility exists of any other perpetrator given the circumstances here.
Frankly, even if CA had the opportunity or any kind of motive, I would think a big "red flag" (pun intended) pointing away from her would be the absence of cameras capturing how she called LE to respond to an accidental death of a child and they did not arrive in time and that she plans to sue. Neither do I belive she would have framed her daughter by putting the body in the trunk of that car and then telling the world what a wonderful mommy she was after admitting to a therapist she thought she might be a sociopath.