Did Jurors Talk About Case during Trial Against Judge's Orders?

[Rapunzel]

Sure they talked beforehand. After hearing the alternate juror and his "we" comments, it is basic common sense.

Er..wait a minute... perhaps a LE officer forced him to say "we" not "I".

No wait- I know what it is, the juror was raised wrong and thinks "we" means "I". His parents did it.

Oh how silly of me, the person that was filming the original tape hid it and altered it. He said "I" but they dubbed in "we".

Nah, the juror is as pure as the driven snow.

I have to say I agree. In hindsight I think he was too worried about moving it along in jury selection and never got a properly death qualified jury.


I absolutely agree. When you have polls where 86% of people say she is guilty it makes no sense that 100% of the jury would disagree.

What made them vote this way???....not kidding...I'm serious here. I think most of Florida was at least 95% thinking she was guilty...so why do 12 jurors totally agree in 10 hours she is not??? Something hinky if you ask me!!!!!!!!!!

 

[kathyn2]

I believe JP moved the trial along way too fast, allowed jurors on the case he shouldn't have like the ones that were in a hurry and had trips planned in early July. The State also let felons on the jury and people that never graduated high school. Those types are usually not very smart. The let people that lived on the wrong side of the law on. You put all these types together. The 2 women that don't judge, the stupid ones that didn't complete school, young men that want to flirt with KC, Felons that already have a bad feeling towards law. They just picked the wrong jury. And then JP bent over backwards to hurry this case along.

I think the prosecution should have put on alot more than they did. They needed to answer the dysfunction about the family and not ignore it like they did. It is so obvious and the jury picked up on it and used it as an excuse to excuse her.

The defense dumbed down to these unintelligent jurors. They used things that those types can understand. They dont' understand the forensics and these new hi falutin tests that were done or decomposed body air in a can that they never got to smell. They understand family dynamics and something better to tie her to Caylee's body.

 

[Rapunzel]

I believe JP moved the trial along way too fast, allowed jurors on the case he shouldn't have like the ones that were in a hurry and had trips planned in early July. The State also let felons on the jury and people that never graduated high school. Those types are usually not very smart. The let people that lived on the wrong side of the law on. You put all these types together. The 2 women that don't judge, the stupid ones that didn't complete school, young men that want to flirt with KC, Felons that already have a bad feeling towards law. They just picked the wrong jury. And then JP bent over backwards to hurry this case along.

I think the prosecution should have put on alot more than they did. They needed to answer the dysfunction about the family and not ignore it like they did. It is so obvious and the jury picked up on it and used it as an excuse to excuse her.

The defense dumbed down to these unintelligent jurors. They used things that those types can understand. They dont' understand the forensics and these new hi falutin tests that were done or decomposed body air in a can that they never got to smell. They understand family dynamics and something better to tie her to Caylee's body.

Look, I'm no freakin genius by any means, but evidently the forensics were way over their heads and they just dismissed all of it...stupid jury as far as I'm concerned...

 

[dog.gone.cute]

I heard that from Karen Levy also that the jurors had seen things on TV that were 'crossed' or something from tv stations so they shut off all the tvs. But I still believe these jurors have been talking to each other thru this whole trial in each other's rooms. Do the guards keep them from each other's rooms? Do they each have their own room during the trial?

I heard Karen Leavey say that about the TVs today as well ...

And I agree with you -- I believe the jurors have been discussing this case from day 1 ...

It's obvious ...


MOO MOO MOO

 

[Pollywog]

Can the state not appeal the jury's decision? I mean JB would have had it gone the other way. I know just wishful thinking on my part. The jurors discussed it and they did what they wanted, why not the attorneys did against judges orders. They may have even had a cell phone concealed some place and kept up via text or some such. We will never know, but IMO they got it WRONG! Karma will give ICA all she has coming and more.

 

[cluciano63]

What made them vote this way???....not kidding...I'm serious here. I think most of Florida was at least 95% thinking she was guilty...so why do 12 jurors totally agree in 10 hours she is not??? Something hinky if you ask me!!!!!!!!!!

Not hinky...not crooked...they just totally misunderstood "reasonable doubt" IMO.

 

[darcedarce]

As Dan Abrams said on Twitter, "This trial is O-V-E-R!"

We can "woulda - shoulda - coulda" all we want. It's over - done - kaput. All we can do now is pray karma catches up with her like it did with OJ.

This may be true but I don't know about the rest of you, I need to detox. I need to hash it out.

 

[darcedarce]

Can the state not appeal the jury's decision? I mean JB would have had it gone the other way. I know just wishful thinking on my part. The jurors discussed it and they did what they wanted, why not the attorneys did against judges orders. They may have even had a cell phone concealed some place and kept up via text or some such. We will never know, but IMO they got it WRONG! Karma will give ICA all she has coming and more.

Nope. State gets no second chance. None.

 

[kathyn2]

State cannot try it over. Its over. Double jeopardy takes place. State could charge someone else for the crime if they could find one but we know KC killed Caylee. I cannot believe those jurors could be so stupid to think that KC made an accident look like a murder and that her father was involved. Too bad GA didn't have any alibi's.

 

[pookie53]

I don't know what happened, but I think they did talk to each other. A few things really bothered me about what this alternate said. Aside from the we's instead of I's, he quoted RC about the "snowballed out of control", the jury was told they were not supposed to consider that testimony as any proof of how Caylee died. It also sounds like they did use the opening statement as evidence, the only other reason was because GA "acted weird". Did they never consider why he would act weird with JB after the accusations that JB was throwing out? Who wouldn't be mad and defensive after being accused of something like that.

I know we have all put so much more thought into this case than the jury did and it is so sad. Maybe they shouldn't have been going out to "special events" baseball games, bowling, special dinners every night. They should have had to sit around and reflect on what they heard in court each day.
I bet none of them will be reading about the case or researching it on their own tonight, tomorrow, or ever. They didn't care enough to look at all the evidence when it was right there in front of them, why would they want to know more about it now. I always had a bad feeling when I heard them always asking for a "special" break and laughing. I think they made their mind up VERY early on in the case.

I also think it went back to jury selection.... they pick people who don't care about what is going on in the world. People who don't care about or ever watch any news. People who sound like they have no kind of person belief or convictions at all. How do you feel about the death penalty? "oh i dont know never thought about it"..... So you want people on a jury who don't think about pretty much anything. People who are gullible enough to believe that people do cover up accidents to look like murder.

Oh one more thing about what this juror said.... something along the lines of "if this ex cop found the car and smelled death he would have surely called the cops". But in the next breath he thinks it IS reasonable that this ex-cop found his grand daughter who accidently drowned in the pool and put duct tape on her and threw her body in a swamp?!?!?!?!?!? I do not understand how this is REASONABLE doubt.

 

[pinkflamingo]

They missed their TV, wanted to go home. I don't blame them for being homesick but perhaps sequestered jurors kept away from their homes makes for quick and poor decisions in some cases?

 

[pinkflamingo]

State cannot try it over. Its over. Double jeopardy takes place. State could charge someone else for the crime if they could find one but we know KC killed Caylee. I cannot believe those jurors could be so stupid to think that KC made an accident look like a murder and that her father was involved. Too bad GA didn't have any alibi's.

Too bad JB couldn't even pin down when Miss Caylee Marie passed away in his opening statement... but these jurors believed him and stopped listening after that. Ugh!!!! :banghead:

 

[D96s]

Too late for a mistrial. It would have meant jury nullification if they had know and could have proved it during the trial.

This guy could have just been attributing his own thoughts to that of the entire jury since they came to the verdict he agreed with. That would explain the pronouns, imoo.

Is there seriously NO reprocusions for this? I find this hard to believe because it just seems like it would happen more often if that is the case.

 

[magnolia]

I believe JP moved the trial along way too fast, allowed jurors on the case he shouldn't have like the ones that were in a hurry and had trips planned in early July. The State also let felons on the jury and people that never graduated high school. Those types are usually not very smart. The let people that lived on the wrong side of the law on. You put all these types together. The 2 women that don't judge, the stupid ones that didn't complete school, young men that want to flirt with KC, Felons that already have a bad feeling towards law. They just picked the wrong jury. And then JP bent over backwards to hurry this case along.

I think the prosecution should have put on alot more than they did. They needed to answer the dysfunction about the family and not ignore it like they did. It is so obvious and the jury picked up on it and used it as an excuse to excuse her.

The defense dumbed down to these unintelligent jurors. They used things that those types can understand. They dont' understand the forensics and these new hi falutin tests that were done or decomposed body air in a can that they never got to smell. They understand family dynamics and something better to tie her to Caylee's body.

BBM This is basically what I wrote in an earlier post. The DT read this Jury very well. They knew exactly what to put out there and knew they would bite. I was very curious why JB called the A's testify to how they buried their pets. It just seemed so ridiculous at the time. Now, I know why.

 

[Mandy113]

IMO, it's likely the jurors did discuss the case before deliberations, especially since they were sequestered. I am shocked there apparerently wasn't even one person who felt a guilty verdict was warranted here. As someone said earlier, the jury likely bonded close together while they were sequestered. I'm wondering if they also made an agreement among themselves as to when & how they'd telll their story to the media. Just speculation on my part and probably meaningless at that.

 

[BlOnDe_GuRrL]

So much for thinking so highly of JP ...IMO He seemed more concerned with moving it along instead of a truly unbiased judgment...IMO

I've felt this way from the beginning.. jury selection was a joke.

 

[pinup]

I don't know what happened, but I think they did talk to each other. A few things really bothered me about what this alternate said. Aside from the we's instead of I's, he quoted RC about the "snowballed out of control", the jury was told they were not supposed to consider that testimony as any proof of how Caylee died. It also sounds like they did use the opening statement as evidence, the only other reason was because GA "acted weird". Did they never consider why he would act weird with JB after the accusations that JB was throwing out? Who wouldn't be mad and defensive after being accused of something like that.

I know we have all put so much more thought into this case than the jury did and it is so sad. Maybe they shouldn't have been going out to "special events" baseball games, bowling, special dinners every night. They should have had to sit around and reflect on what they heard in court each day.
I bet none of them will be reading about the case or researching it on their own tonight, tomorrow, or ever. They didn't care enough to look at all the evidence when it was right there in front of them, why would they want to know more about it now. I always had a bad feeling when I heard them always asking for a "special" break and laughing. I think they made their mind up VERY early on in the case.

I also think it went back to jury selection.... they pick people who don't care about what is going on in the world. People who don't care about or ever watch any news. People who sound like they have no kind of person belief or convictions at all. How do you feel about the death penalty? "oh i dont know never thought about it"..... So you want people on a jury who don't think about pretty much anything. People who are gullible enough to believe that people do cover up accidents to look like murder.

Oh one more thing about what this juror said.... something along the lines of "if this ex cop found the car and smelled death he would have surely called the cops". But in the next breath he thinks it IS reasonable that this ex-cop found his grand daughter who accidently drowned in the pool and put duct tape on her and threw her body in a swamp?!?!?!?!?!? I do not understand how this is REASONABLE doubt.

I agree completely with you, as depressing as it is. I was in a jury pool a few weeks ago. There were several masters students in the pool (myself included), a couple of PhD students, and a couple of professors. Not one of us were selected for the jury. I'm beginning to believe that attorneys don't want educated people on juries--we can form our own opinions through critical thinking, and they don't like that.

 

[IzzyBlanche]

I was a juror on a criminal case once. (Not a violent crime.)

The defense was basically Some Other Dude Did It. Several promises were made in opening statements that were never kept.

My view was that the prosecution proved its case WELL beyond a reasonable doubt. But when we took our first poll, the vote was 9-3 in favor of acquittal!

I could NOT believe it. I was thinking, did you guys sit through the same trial I did? Nine completely reasonable-seeming people BOUGHT that defense?

We deliberated that day for about 2 hours before time to go home, and by then the vote was 11 to 1. I was the 1, and I can tell you it is NOT a pleasant place to be.

IIRC, I think we twice sent messages to the judge that we were deadlocked, and he told us to keep trying.

Then when we left, the entire city was engulfed in a traffic jam. I am not kidding, all the freeways and alternate routes were packed, and even I gave up trying to get home in a reasonable time frame; I called a friend and asked if I could come over until the traffic died down.

All I could think about was how those other eleven jurors were cursing me because if I hadn't held out they would have been home long before the traffic jam started.

So all that night after I finally got home, I tossed and turned and didn't sleep, got up to write down my thoughts, went back to bed and still didn't sleep, and showed up for the next day's deliberations exhausted and drained.

As a result of my fatigue and stress--there's no other explanation--the other jurors' faulty logic started to make weird sense to me, and I caved.

To this day I regret this, and am ashamed of it. If I had it to do over, I would hang that jury. And I still believe I would have if I had had more sleep and wasn't totally exhausted on the second day. My defenses wear down quickly when I am seriously fatigued.

And I also have to believe that I would have held out stronger if it had been a violent crime.

No one who knows me personally--and I bet even some of you who know me from here, eh ?--would ever say I am anything other than firm in my beliefs, and unlikely to be swayed by peer pressure.

Yet somehow--I was.

I am not defending the jury in any way--I think their verdict was wrong in every way possible--but I am just saying maybe something like my experience happened with them.

ETA: At least if something like this came out, I would be more able to make sense of the verdict. Not agree with it, but understand how it was reached.

 

[Baxter]

When Karen Levy the court coordinator met with the media this morning she mentioned that a few days ago all TV was taken away from the jurors because they found out some channels were picking up news from parent companies. So why didn't they declare a mistrial? What if these jurors were listening to JVM or Geraldo?

One Geraldo show would definitely make them think not guilty.

The way the alternate was talking in "we's" I think they were talking.

 

[sincityvixen]

One Geraldo show would definitely make them think not guilty.

The way the alternate was talking in "we's" I think they were talking.

I was a juror on a trial for an ex felon found carrying a weapon. There was a mountain of evidence against the guy. It took us four days of deliberations, reviewing evidence, going over transcripts, ect to finally come up with a verdict. This is horrible.. I am sick.