Did the jury get it wrong, or...

[gladiatorqueen]

I actually think the better trial of comparison to this one is Lizzie Borden's not SP.

 

[natsound]

The fact that VP is reporting the jury "loved" baez tells me right there the jury was not very good judges of character especially after his inappropriateness on the courtroom..... Wendy M is cracked.

Who is Wendy M?

 

[yolorado]

The fact that VP is reporting the jury "loved" baez tells me right there the jury was not very good judges of character especially after his inappropriateness on the courtroom..... Wendy M is cracked.

I think Wendy is "seeing" Jose's KC wild trial theories and "raising" him a couple! I seriously doubt she believes what I heard her say tonight.

 

[technicalconfusion]

The fact is, there is a far greater likelihood that Casey Anthony IS the monster that we all believe she is than the other way around. I would lay you odds on it that if we live long enough, we will come to find this out, just as Joran Van DerSloot reoffended? So too will this offender. Mark it down, because it's a cold hard fact that this is not the last we will ever hear of this sociopath...unless of course, it changes it name...:maddening:

She may not be able to change her name. She's a felon ya know. 6 times in fact!

 

[HatesSociopaths]

The jury loved JB because they couldn't confront evil. They much preferred the story he was selling. Having to sort through the details of a vicious mother killing her baby with chloroform and duct tape, then leaving it in a trashbag in her trunk for a few days while having non-stop sex with her new boyfriend before throwing the body in a swamp, and then leading her friends, family and authorities on a wild goose chase for months trying to locate a baby she knew was dead, was too uncomfortable for them. The foreman could not even stomach saying Caylee was "dumped" by the side of the road.

 

[liltexans]

fell and hit her head and Scott panicked and threw her in the ocean while he was fishing. They had no evidence of how, when or where she died. Just like Caylee.

I agree. I'll bet right now Scott Peterson is kicking himself and saying, "I should have said Laci went fishing with me that morning and fell overboard and drowned."

 

[Desdemona]

This is a rush transcript from "On the Record," July 11, 2011. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX NEWS HOST: In six days, Casey Anthony is expected to leave her Orange County jail cell, where she's been for nearly three years. Many of you are very upset by the verdict, wondering how she could be found not guilty of murder. The jury foreperson said he was unconvinced by the prosecution's evidence surrounding the duct tape as the cause of death.


We wanted to get more information. We asked Casey's defense attorney, J. Cheney Mason.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

VAN SUSTEREN: We interviewed one of the jurors, or actually the jury foreperson. And what he said was the reason behind the finding was that the prosecution couldn't prove to them beyond a reasonable doubt the cause of death. And I asked him to explain to me this duct tape because it's hung up a lot of viewers. And I'm -- could you explain to me -- because we don't have the photographs -- where was the duct tape on the remains when the remains were found?

J. CHENEY MASON, ANTHONY DEFENSE ATTORNEY: There was no duct tape on the remains, except for part of the hair mat on the lower right side. The other duct tape, piece number three, was found about eight or nine feet away. There was never any evidence of duct tape being actually placed across that child's mouth or nose. That was a figment of Mr. Ashton's imagination.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/on-th...hose-who-have-threatened-jurors#ixzz1RtXUIt2D

|BBM| That is an outright LIE and CM knows it. Unconscionable.

 

[Soulmagent]

Did you even listen to Mr. Masons and the jury foremans description of the position of the duct tape? It was not wrapped around the skull. They both said that. The 3rd piece was found 9 feet away. It was stuck in the hair, and only on one side of the skull. How could the prosecution ever think they could, with all honesty call that the murder weapon. How could Dr. G even use it in coming to a conclusion of homicide. That is why they had to manufacture the video of the super-imposed duct tape photo-shopped across the picture of Caylee. If it was apparant that the duct tape was across the nose and mouth of the skull, that would not have been necessary. They knew the jury could not come to that conclusion with the actual crime scene photos because that is not what they showed, so they got some guy to make a video..that video was not evidence..thats crazy.

Cheney Mason says it was a figment of JA imagination about what the role of the duct tape was. I believe him.

How could a jury take this kind of evidence and convict a person of murder?

The duct tape also wasnt stuck with ANYTHING sticky it was stringy strands of material, that was tangled in her hair. Also no explaination that makes since on why the decomposition did not stain the material fibers (because the area was not underwater for a few weeks after Caylee body was left there. And decomp staining wouldnt come off of those fibers which why they cannot say the duct tape was ever on Caylee's face. I would have occured while she was in the trunk for the days they said she was in there. I believe she was in the trunk but for 3 or 4 hours tops. I am tired of seeing Stuck to skull ,it wasnt. It wasnt even STUCK to her her. It was tangled in it.

 

[Solange82200]

The duct tape also wasnt stuck with ANYTHING sticky it was stringy strands of material, that was tangled in her hair. Also no explaination that makes since on why the decomposition did not stain the material fibers (because the area was not underwater for a few weeks after Caylee body was left there. And decomp staining wouldnt come off of those fibers which why they cannot say the duct tape was ever on Caylee's face. I would have occured while she was in the trunk for the days they said she was in there. I believe she was in the trunk but for 3 or 4 hours tops. I am tired of seeing Stuck to skull ,it wasnt. It wasnt even STUCK to her her. It was tangled in it.

Enough with the staining, we have no idea if it was stained. Maybe all the fibers were stained, but we cant tell since we dont know how it looked before. That really is a bizarre thing to latch onto as proof that duct tape wasnt there. And I cant even tell you how many times its been pointed out that of course the duct tape wasnt stuck to the skull, it was stuck to the FACE that is now gone. The duct tape is where it would have been considering the face came off.

 

[kimmera]

Clock's Tickin---I was just about to post the same argument for a finding of aggravated manslaughter, but as I continued reading, found you had done it for me. I agree 100%.

The fact that an "opening statement" is not evidence, has no bearing, since "accident that snowballed out of control" was the jury's most likely scenario. No matter what kind of accident--"medical care, and emergency services" were intentionally withheld. " a prudent person would consider reporting the incident of (accident or death) as essential to the well being of their child"

This is why I never understood why they did not find her guilty of aggravated manslaughter.

The fact that not ONE question or piece of evidence was brought up for review is just astonishing, and one of the things that, for me , makes this verdict outrageous. God knows, from the jury interviews, especially the foremen, they didn't have a clue what options were on the table. If they felt it was an accident, those 31 days come into play.

BBM~

This I agree with totally. Instead, the foreman of this jury thinks that GA is somehow involved, and possibly murdered Caylee. WTH? For real? GA was NOT on trial, and was never even a suspect in the case. Not only that, but GA was the ONE person in that family that had HONEST emotions about the 'disappearance' of Caylee. Perhaps he didn't make a great witness, but I know in my heart that Caylee was GA's reason for waking up every morning.

But from ALL of the evidence presented, this jury is able to extrapolate that GA was involved, but NOT KC? WTH? For real? Mind boggling. Freaking mind boggling.

I could go on, but my point is that there WERE other charges on the table, It was NOT DP or NOTHING, as every single one of these jurors have made it sound. ALL OF THEM have said that they could not give KC the DP...well guess what? That was NOT their job to decide. How could all 12 of them have misunderstood this?

A better question is, why did they not deliberate? 11 hours, minus breaks, equals about 7 hours. Allow about 2 hours to go through jury instructions, more or less. What's left? 5-6 hours, tops. For over 5 weeks of trial? For real? They cared NOTHING about the State's case, their evidence, or the judge's instructions. CLEARLY, they did not!

I realize that I should be moving into the 'acceptance' phase of this verdict, but the more these jurors talk, the MADDER I GET!!!! :banghead::twocents:

 

[Lovejac]

Did you even listen to Mr. Masons and the jury foremans description of the position of the duct tape? It was not wrapped around the skull. They both said that. The 3rd piece was found 9 feet away. It was stuck in the hair, and only on one side of the skull. How could the prosecution ever think they could, with all honesty call that the murder weapon. How could Dr. G even use it in coming to a conclusion of homicide. That is why they had to manufacture the video of the super-imposed duct tape photo-shopped across the picture of Caylee. If it was apparant that the duct tape was across the nose and mouth of the skull, that would not have been necessary. They knew the jury could not come to that conclusion with the actual crime scene photos because that is not what they showed, so they got some guy to make a video..that video was not evidence..thats crazy.

Cheney Mason says it was a figment of JA imagination about what the role of the duct tape was. I believe him.

How could a jury take this kind of evidence and convict a person of murder?

Actually it was the 4th piece of duct tape that was away from the body.

Duct tape #1, duct tape #2 and duct tape #3 were on Caylee's face. That is the reason the mandible was still attached.

 

[Lovejac]

OMG, now Cheney Mason is on Greta, spouting lies as facts and saying JA had an active imagination. I guess it was a shared fantasy as so many others said the same thing. He never knew the facts of the case, I guess facts are not important to him as he just discredits them all anyway.

Yet again, CM is showing he's not even in the same class as Jeff Ashton.

Why you be hatin' on Jeff, Cheney? Jealous much?

 

[Lovejac]

There is no reason not to believe George Anthony. He as an excop would know that hiding a body of a person that died accidentally could end up with people going to jail (including him). it is nonsensical. Here are some more reasons:

- Casey the loving mother did not even care her child died, that is a clue, no matter how much you try to blame it on "abuse"

- duct tape on/near the face of the child

-tons of evidence that she rode around with caylee in her trunk for several days. if George disposed of the body, why would it be in Casey;s trunk for several days?

- cell records that enforce what George said (meaning cell tower info shows casey left the house when he said she did, and returned after george went to work, which his employer confirmed he did).

- the fact that Casey was charged with murder early on. if you knew your child died accidentally, and you get put in jail and charged with murder, wouldnt you tell them where the body is right away so they can do an autopsy and prove it was a drowning? maybe you can argue that casey would know it was too late by then, but i still think in general its nonsensical to believe you would sit in jail on a murder charge for three years and not say otherwise.

Now, people can take some of the things from my list and try to explain them away, but you wouldnt have to explain away so many things if it truly was an accident.

BBM

If they had BOTHERED looking at the evidence that was available to them, THEY WOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT!

This is why I will never 'respect the jurors verdict'

 

[Thinker Belle]

Have you ever bought consecutive losing scratch-off lottery tickets? Even though it defies the odds, it can happen that you have selected a series of duds. And that, to put it lightly is my feeling toward this jury. I will never agree with or understand their verdict. Period.

 

[Lovejac]

I don't agree with the verdict but you are confusing innocence with 'not guilty'. Their own interviews say they don't believe she's 'innocent', just that the state didn't somehow prove how she murdered her little girl.

Does someone here know exactly how Caylee died and in what manner? Do you know when Casey mixed chloroform? In manner was it used? When did she take the body out of the car? Did she bury her first? If you know all these answers, why weren't you testifying for the state?

And again, I will inform that the State didn't have to prove how she murdered Caylee.

 

[Lovejac]

I don't agree with the verdict either, but the fact that you call people unintelligent who do (because they really don't think the state proved their case) is downright insulting.

It's called a difference of opinion.

Difference of opinion.............miscarriage of justice..........

 

[Lovejac]

But homicide does not mean murder and it does not exclude George.
I am not saying it was George at all.
I think the jury is saying they did not know what speculation to believe because in their opinion everyone was speculating.

Jbean, honestly, you are giving them way more credit than I can.

Every single juror or alternate that has spoken out, has shown, by their own words that they didn't even understand the Jury Instructions.

 

[Solange82200]

What irks me the most, is when jurors try to play detective and treat this like a game of Clue. They start speculating and going away from the evidence. I mean, you have experienced detectives investigating this case for three years. The fact that a PE teacher (no offense to PE teachers) thinks that George is a murderer, when all these experienced detectives never even considered him a suspect, tells me that jurors really dont understand their role. If George did something, the police would have investigated him and presented evidence. They dont pick a person and then find evidence, they find evidence and it leads them to a person.

I understand they can doubt the state's case, I have no problem with that, but when juries start speculating that they somehow know more than experienced detectives to the point where they suspect an innocent person, who isnt even on trial, of a crime, something is wrong there. I think its arrogant, and I think there is a large part of our society who doesn't respect the police department or what they do.

 

[Solange82200]

And how can you take anything Jose Baez says seriously when he blames the police for not "reading Casey;s mind" and guessing it was an accident? I mean, seriously??? It's their fault they didnt know it was an accident? Even though they repeatedly asked her and she kept denying? Even though her parents refused to even consider that Caylee was dead? The fact that he called them DESPERATE, when they spent so much time and effort searching for a live Caylee??? Even if you believe the crap about an accidental drowning, I cannot believe any reasonable person can blame the police for this. The ARROGANCE of trying to insult them when they bent over backwards to help find Casey;s daughter, even when she did everything in her power to stop them. I have never been so disgusted in my life. How can anyone believe anything this man says, after he acts in such a DISGUSTING, COWARDLY, MANNER???

 

[gladiatorqueen]

And again, I will inform that the State didn't have to prove how she murdered Caylee.

But that's what they based their entire case on!!!! Was the how! And then they couldn't prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.