Casey Not Guilty?

[merker]

Yes, we were ynotdivein - and I want to add one more thing to your post about juries.

Something we MUST keep in mind - is that we have combed over and over through this evidence. So much so that we aren't as horrified by it as we first were - when we first grabbed onto this case and wouldn't let go.

Do you remember what it was like to listen to Dr. G.? When we first heard that little Caylee's body was spread in tiny fragments over that large area just behind the Anthony home? When we first looked at the photos of the Winnie The Poo blanket, the Bag, the duct tape and far far more?

For those who have not followed this case from the beginning and are sitting on the jury - can you imagine what it will be like to actually be there, and hear and see it in real time, not reading about it after the fact like we are?

How many words can you think of to describe how they will be feeling? Horrified? Shocked? Disgusted? Nauseous?

But innocent? Ha! No Way!

Some of the bits of bones were 4 inches under the muck...sad
There was standing water S of the site of the bags...sadder...that we still have the water argument.
KC's actions/words for the 31 days along with the crime scene pics will make the jury convict...have faith in truth
JMO

 

[Horace Finklestein]

When I first opened this thread this morning, I thought - I can't believe we are still talking about ICA being found not guilty.

Seriously - it's laughable that the Defense is now saying - oh geez - bad OCSD - they only focused on ICA, and should have looked at other possible offenders.

Remember how this case started? As a missing child case. Grandma calls 911 and says her grand daughter has been missing for 31 days. The detectives arrive looking for a MISSING child. Does the mother cooperate? Sure - ICA tells them she dropped this child off at an empty apartment - not one that became empty after she dropped the child off - but had in fact been empty for months. ICA dropped this child off to a nanny she'd been using for two years. This nanny hadn't been seen by anyone else but ICA. This nanny had never sent or received a text or a phone call from the texting queen, and there were no pictures of this nanny. An over protective grand ma had never spoken to or met this nanny. This nanny and her sisters and mother cannot be traced. People who don't exist referred this nanny to ICA.

ICA took the detectives to a non existent job in a non existent office, working for a non-existing boss. ICA did not tell her parents, her friends or her flavor of the month her child was missing. She partied even harder, avoided her parents, lied about where her child was, and only when forced by her mother, even admitted her child was missing.

ICA drove a car whose trunk stunk of human decomp. Her child was found tossed away like so much garbage a couple of blocks from her home, bound in a rare duct tape, found surprisingly identical to duct tape found in her home, a bagged in garbage bags similar to those in her home, and bagged with a blanket, and a cloth bag exactly like those in her home.

ICA has refused to cooperate from day one. And the defense is questioning why the detectives didn't search for anyone else? Well, actually they did - ask Zenaida Frernandez Gonzales! Ask Roy Kronk. And so on.

C'mon people, the defense is trying to create doubt. Why is it working here at Websleuths?

The defense has an uphill battle imo trying to get people to think they should have focused on anyone but ICA. To this day, she has never told anyone the truth about where she last saw Caylee. That is amazing to me.

 

[Gaia713]

When I first opened this thread this morning, I thought - I can't believe we are still talking about ICA being found not guilty.

Seriously - it's laughable that the Defense is now saying - oh geez - bad OCSD - they only focused on ICA, and should have looked at other possible offenders.

Remember how this case started? As a missing child case. Grandma calls 911 and says her grand daughter has been missing for 31 days. The detectives arrive looking for a MISSING child. Does the mother cooperate? Sure - ICA tells them she dropped this child off at an empty apartment - not one that became empty after she dropped the child off - but had in fact been empty for months. ICA dropped this child off to a nanny she'd been using for two years. This nanny hadn't been seen by anyone else but ICA. This nanny had never sent or received a text or a phone call from the texting queen, and there were no pictures of this nanny. An over protective grand ma had never spoken to or met this nanny. This nanny and her sisters and mother cannot be traced. People who don't exist referred this nanny to ICA.

ICA took the detectives to a non existent job in a non existent office, working for a non-existing boss. ICA did not tell her parents, her friends or her flavor of the month her child was missing. She partied even harder, avoided her parents, lied about where her child was, and only when forced by her mother, even admitted her child was missing.

ICA drove a car whose trunk stunk of human decomp. Her child was found tossed away like so much garbage a couple of blocks from her home, bound in a rare duct tape, found surprisingly identical to duct tape tethink it is working here. And I don't think it will work in the trial either.

I have to admit that I am totally floored by the defense tactics - they are ridiculous and ludicrous at best, poor lawyering at worst. The police focused on what they should have. When ICA started lying to LE at the getgo, they did not have to look any farther. Why would a woman who has a missing child LIE about where she left the child and make up a non-existent nanny? ICA was the last person to see her daughter alive, and she could never be ruled out as a suspect thanks to her own lies.

So what Baez is claiming is BAD police work is, in reality, GOOD police work.

 

[strach304]

It's the exact same tactic used in the Scott Peterson trial. The detective got on the stand and named 40 points all leading to Scott. No matter where or what it always led right back to him. It's the same fiasco, the bullseye defense is what they call it I believe. There were gypsies and robbers, etc. Didn't work for him and it won't most especially for Casey.

 

[Ricki]

I hope this is OK to post and this is the right thread to do it. I found C. Rich | America Speaks Ink. The writer seems to be a big supporter of CA and KC. He also claims he will be publishing an article on Monday that will prove without a shadow of a doubt that KC did not place Caylee in the woods. He has written other articles about the players in this case. Any thoughts on this?

 

[Murdock]

I hope this is OK to post and this is the right thread to do it. I found C. Rich | America Speaks Ink. The writer seems to be a big supporter of CA and KC. He also claims he will be publishing an article on Monday that will prove without a shadow of a doubt that KC did not place Caylee in the woods. He has written other articles about the players in this case. Any thoughts on this?

C. Rich once said that KC must be innocent because she's a "hot chick" and only ugly women kill their children. He has zero credibility, IMO.

 

[Just Jayla]

The defense has an uphill battle imo trying to get people to think they should have focused on anyone but ICA. To this day, she has never told anyone the truth about where she last saw Caylee. That is amazing to me.

Huge hurdle for the defense.
Also, I am not so sure the jury is going to like KC's appearance...let me try to elaborate-KC is fidgity, KC sniffs and juts her chin when she fake cries (denoting that she is acting more than experiencing real feelings), she tries to be sullen, she fake-cries sporadically, her eyes dart around and she focuses too much on what her attorneys are writing, like she is fearful of something....now in my mind, someone who is not guilty has slightly different body language-Defiant, outraged, shocked, focused and a more upright, alert posture.
JMO, but I don't think the hair or the clothes do anything for her, she is too diminutive a presense (and I am not referring to her being petite) for someone wrongfully accused of murdering their adored child. IOW, I might be a sexy mama, but I would be a pissed sexy mama ready to fight the injustice and demand real justice. If I had to cry, my crying would be from the gut and would last more than 2 seconds.
Maybe she is under the assumption that feigned femininity will help...like if she behaves like an injured butterfly, she will garner sympathy. Hard to write what I am thinking here....but I think she misses the point that attractive is only attractive to a jury when they can believe that you are also upstanding.

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

I wasn't aware of this CRich person, so I had to look him up..
http://americaspeaksink.com/2010/04/casey-anthony-did-not-plan-murder/

My belief, he's got some grudge against the judicial system....doesn't seem so well informed or why ICA didn't give any credible information...

Once this trial get underway and it comes time to show the autopsy photos, those jurors will no doubt be crying at the sight of this precious childs skeletal remains and darn angry at the duct tape over her airways, holding her mandible in place. They will be told everything found with Caylee had to come from the Hopespring Drive home, where she resided with her mother and grandparents...They will surely put all the incredible information given by a mother who allowed 31 days to go by without telling a soul Caylee was allegedly abducted. Then, it wasn't the mother who calls authorities, even as her mother, CA tells ICA, the 911 dispatcher wants to talk to you, she states, what do they want me for! Just unreal...

Her calm demeanor during her interview with LE, telling them she didn't care what evidence they had, she felt (you know that motherly feeling) Caylee was still alive and very close...truth be told, she knew exactly where Caylee was...everything found with Caylee links right back to the home she shared with her grandparents...

Caylee will get her justice, I do believe when it comes to a child, the last one with physical custody will come under fire. To add to it, she led LE on a wild goose chase, gave them nothing credible to work with, they found not one person ICA told them about. All very significant, IMO...

Those jurors will see through any smoke and mirrors the defense puts out there. Trying to blame this on another person is surely suicide, they should take a truthful approach, tell the reason why this happened (I do believe in that physical altercation that CA is adamant didnt' occur) was the catalyst for Caylee's demise. They should plead her guilty, beg for mercy/leniency and save her own self from a date with the executioner...JMHO

When one points a finger at someone else, they should remember, there are three fingers pointing back at them....JMHO

Justice for Caylee

 

[logicalgirl]

Huge hurdle for the defense.
Also, I am not so sure the jury is going to like KC's appearance...let me try to elaborate-KC is fidgity, KC sniffs and juts her chin when she fake cries (denoting that she is acting more than experiencing real feelings), she tries to be sullen, she fake-cries sporadically, her eyes dart around and she focuses too much on what her attorneys are writing, like she is fearful of something....now in my mind, someone who is not guilty has slightly different body language-Defiant, outraged, shocked, focused and a more upright, alert posture.
JMO, but I don't think the hair or the clothes do anything for her, she is too diminutive a presense (and I am not referring to her being petite) for someone wrongfully accused of murdering their adored child. IOW, I might be a sexy mama, but I would be a pissed sexy mama ready to fight the injustice and demand real justice. If I had to cry, my crying would be from the gut and would last more than 2 seconds.
Maybe she is under the assumption that feigned femininity will help...like if she behaves like an injured butterfly, she will garner sympathy. Hard to write what I am thinking here....but I think she misses the point that attractive is only attractive to a jury when they can believe that you are also upstanding.

I absolutely agree with you Jayla and you bring up some good points. Not wanting to put words in your mouth (in case you believe something different to what I do) here's the issue I see.

I believe ICA is a sociopath. She does not have the basis of original feelings the rest of us who are not sociopaths do. I'm not saying she doesn't have feelings, but her feelings are inappropriate to the rest of us.

So ICA has a real challenge at trial. She has to fake her feelings, she is acting feelings that she thinks she should have, and try to shut down the feelings she is actually having. Most of the time in the hearings we've seen, like you've said, she has actually sat there showing little or no feelings, or else she is twitching, stroking, constantly grooming, and frantically writing or watching the documents her lawyers have in front of them.

So how will the jury view her? Well she sure won't look "normal"! She'll show anger when she should be extremely distressed, she'll look bored when she should be horrified when the SA discuss how Caylee died, she will laugh inappropriately, and obviously shed a few fake tears when her lawyers are talking about her, not Caylee.

We know ICA has a very short attention span, and I don't believe all the pre-trial coaching will show a consistent change of behavior. She'll remember how she is supposed to be for a few minutes, then I think she'll revert back to her very unlikable self. In other words, I think ICA will present a "self" a jury will believe could - no did - murder her own child.

I almost feel sorry for the Defense. Not.

 

[Ricki]

C. Rich once said that KC must be innocent because she's a "hot chick" and only ugly women kill their children. He has zero credibility, IMO.

I have done more reading of his articles. Yes, zero credibility.
I find it astounding on the outlandish reasons a FEW people have on KC innocence.IMO

 

[LiveLaughLuv]

Huge hurdle for the defense.
Also, I am not so sure the jury is going to like KC's appearance...let me try to elaborate-KC is fidgity, KC sniffs and juts her chin when she fake cries (denoting that she is acting more than experiencing real feelings), she tries to be sullen, she fake-cries sporadically, her eyes dart around and she focuses too much on what her attorneys are writing, like she is fearful of something....now in my mind, someone who is not guilty has slightly different body language-Defiant, outraged, shocked, focused and a more upright, alert posture.
JMO, but I don't think the hair or the clothes do anything for her, she is too diminutive a presense (and I am not referring to her being petite) for someone wrongfully accused of murdering their adored child. IOW, I might be a sexy mama, but I would be a pissed sexy mama ready to fight the injustice and demand real justice. If I had to cry, my crying would be from the gut and would last more than 2 seconds.
Maybe she is under the assumption that feigned femininity will help...like if she behaves like an injured butterfly, she will garner sympathy. Hard to write what I am thinking here....but I think she misses the point that attractive is only attractive to a jury when they can believe that you are also upstanding.

Her facial expressions too, Jayla...when ICA doesn't agree with what is being said, she purses her lips, figits alot more and writes feverishly on paper...she will come off as defiant, arrogant and uncaring. Just doesn't fit properly to someone who is innocent..When that high bail was placed on her, why didn't she scream out to the judge, how will I find my child? I can never get that bail posted, what will become of my baby??? or something to that effect...she just took it and grinned, eyes wide and sashayed all the way to the bullpen...she did nothing to help locate Caylee for my belief is, she knew where she was the entire time. If the SA did make her an offer, to lead them to Caylee they would give her a lesser charge, knowing how Caylee was found, she could not have done that. How would she explain it? Just like she can't explain it now without coming off as a purely evil mother. Whatever she does it just can't explain the WHY's of Caylee's demise...unless of course she does throw her mother out there for her upbringing, her verbal/mental abuse, and that physical altercation on June 15, 2008..She was in a rage and lost it, took it out on Caylee when she wanted to take it out on her mother. Either way she's a coward and she's evil, just doesn' look good for ICA...JMHO


Justice for Caylee

 

[USARDOG]

C.Rich looks to me to be just another person trying to gain fame and wealth off of the death of little Caylee.

 

[countzero]

Has there been any kind of official reason given why the documents have been delayed?

Nope. I posted earlier today on the ICAs visitors thread about this. ICAs new attorney Sims visited ICA the day AFTER JB was given this video by the SAO.

Hinky meter went up after reading that. Then again, there are no coincidences in life either. So, I do believe there is some connection between what CA told in her interview of 7.29.08 and this visit to ICA by Sims on 7.30.10 for a couple of hours. We have seen the CAs interviews the day prior and the day after this held back video.

Something is brewing for the defense .... but it isn't a sweet smell.

 

[shotgun09]

OK, furthering that info, when was it again that Conway said, "I'm done here?". I think it was after this visit from Sims ( and therefore after the tape was released)?

 

[Ricki]

It is hard for me to understand our justice system. Getting perps off on reasonable doubt just does not seem right. The defense gets a perp off who they know is guilty and that is their victory. If Mr Baez and crew wanted credibility as a good lawyers, I would like to see them him play out the last scene in "And Justice For All" in the courtroom. I can not quote the last works spoken in that scene here but that would be justice. I don't see that ever happening though. JMHO

 

[Heather31]

There's no way any jury could ever come up with a not guilty verdict. I just can't see that happening. But I can see the dream team pulling something that would mess up the trial. I've always wondered if they could convince one of the A's to say they killed caylee to save ICA. Would that even work in favor of the defense? The other thing I wondered about, if they discredit enough jurors could that help them? There's no way they're getting a not guilty based on facts of the case, so what else is there?

 

[littlemisslegal]

the day we hear guilty or not guilty will be an incredible news day. i would not want to be her if she is able to walk away because i would fear for my safety in the real world. i would beg please let me be in a place no one will hurt me, that i do not have to look over my shoulder because the threat of someone taking the law into their own hands would terrify me. she will not have an easy time if she walks unless they give her witness protection and she looks like someone else. we know she can act good, but the rest is not so easy to just resume her old life.her family will be in danger to cause many will want revenge on casey . i would think it would be living hell to be able to walk out jail and be on own in the world of those who hate her. shes safer in jail perhaps if innocent is said that day. alternative of death penalty will put her family in hell emotionally. why did this all have to be ? sad

 

[Gaia713]

It's the exact same tactic used in the Scott Peterson trial. The detective got on the stand and named 40 points all leading to Scott. No matter where or what it always led right back to him. It's the same fiasco, the bullseye defense is what they call it I believe. There were gypsies and robbers, etc. Didn't work for him and it won't most especially for Casey.

Spaghetti defense. Throw it all on the wall and see what sticks. NADA

 

[ZsaZsa]

It is hard for me to understand our justice system. Getting perps off on reasonable doubt just does not seem right. The defense gets a perp off who they know is guilty and that is their victory. If Mr Baez and crew wanted credibility as a good lawyers, I would like to see them him play out the last scene in "And Justice For All" in the courtroom. I can not quote the last works spoken in that scene here but that would be justice. I don't see that ever happening though. JMHO

I feel exactly the same way. At the end of the day, what they are doing is making excuses for murderers. Not something I could live with..

 

[Gaia713]

C. Rich once said that KC must be innocent because she's a "hot chick" and only ugly women kill their children. He has zero credibility, IMO.

Time to get out the shovel. He's been drinking too much KoolAid