Does the State's Case Have Any Weaknesses? What Are They?

[zoomom]

I'm worried that they will have the dirt on her shoes evidence, but no prints (partial or otherwise) on the duct tape. To me, a jury would believe prints over matching dirt samples (even though I know better and believe dirt matches are proof).

 

[meta]

Based on the evidence presented to the public so far...

1. The State doesn't have a cause of death.
2. The State doesn't know where the death occurred.
3. The State doesn't know exactly when the death occurred.
4. The State doesn't have any evidence directly linking KC to the death.
5. The State doesn't have any evidence of prior abuse or history of neglect.
6. The State doesn't have any evidence to suggest KC would be capable (mentally, morally) of coldly murdering her daughter.
7. Several of the State's witnesses (KC's friends) all seemed to turn on her at the same time the media frenzy started, indicating they wanted to distance themselves from her only after the case broke and didn't have issues with her before. This suggests there are other reasons they are all so 'ready' to testify against her, weakening their credibility as character witnesses.
8. KW and DC will both testify that they searched the woods and didn't find a body, which will place some skepticism on claims the body was there since August.
9. Investigators/LE screwed up a few times (eg, additional hairs found in the car, premature/accidental release of jail videos, etc) that may render some forensic and other evidence inadmissible or other technical/procedural issues.

IMO, the State has a lot of work to do... which is as it should be.

 

[Never4GetCaylee]

I am worried about the fact that the state doesn't have a cause of death.

I totally agree. I think this is a problem for the SA and I'm really surprised they put DP back on the table with out having the cause of death.

I know, I know, you have the duct tape that says "not an accident" but I think the defense could still argue it was an accident and KC used the duct tape to cover up and make it look like a kidnapping. Granted, this is a ridiculous scenario, but the jury is not going to be made of WS'ers and a few of them might be receptive to anything that can, in their minds, give them a reason not to give her the DP.

I also think Deputy Cain and other searches of the area where Caylee was found and nothing being found is going to be a problem too. JB is going to argue alot of people searched that area and didn't find anything. He is going to try and say Caylee was put there while KC was in jail.

 

[Bishoptutu]

Based on what we know so far, IMO there is no evidence of premeditation and no evidence that proves that this was murder as opposed to an accident (with or without contributory negligence) and cowardly cover-up. Also, unless there is evidence that the duct tape was applied before death, and/or that Caylee was drugged on a regular basis, or of some other form of aggravated child abuse (specific criteria applies), then I don't see evidence to support felony murder either. So in terms of the key charges against KC, if they don't have such evidence then the case could well be weak.

But can't this argument be nullified because Casey 'claimed' her daughter was kidnapped? Once prosecutors show there are NO phone records EVER of Casey speaking with a nanny and then with interviews from people who have NEVER met or even spoken with the nanny it will trump the accident theory. I think that theory could have ONLY worked if Casey would have come clean at some point. If they try to then say accident at trial the fact that she made up this nanny (for YEARS prior to the death of her daughter) that sounds like premeditation to me. She created this fictitious nanny so she could have an out when Caylee went 'missing'.

 

[Jolynna]

I think this is a big one. It may seem simple. But I am afraid Jurors will see a young pretty mother and think she is not capable of such a thing and if she did do it then it must have been an accident.

My husband thinks it is wrong to kill KC - however the other day a man plead guilty to being angry and shaking his baby who later died and my husband immediately said he should get the DP.

How can he think this? In his mind KC seems like an innocent young girl who made a huge mistake.

My brother thinks she did it but feels SORRY for her. He said she looked scared during the last hearing.

IMO, most men idealize and feel protective toward young, vulnerable looking and yes, especially pretty females.

 

[Sundance]

Based on the evidence presented to the public so far...

1. The State doesn't have a cause of death.
2. The State doesn't know where the death occurred.
3. The State doesn't know exactly when the death occurred.
4. The State doesn't have any evidence directly linking KC to the death.
5. The State doesn't have any evidence of prior abuse or history of neglect.
6. The State doesn't have any evidence to suggest KC would be capable (mentally, morally) of coldly murdering her daughter.
7. Several of the State's witnesses (KC's friends) all seemed to turn on her at the same time the media frenzy started, indicating they wanted to distance themselves from her only after the case broke and didn't have issues with her before. This suggests there are other reasons they are all so 'ready' to testify against her, weakening their credibility as character witnesses.
8. KW and DC will both testify that they searched the woods and didn't find a body, which will place some skepticism on claims the body was there since August.9. Investigators/LE screwed up a few times (eg, additional hairs found in the car, premature/accidental release of jail videos, etc) that may render some forensic and other evidence inadmissible or other technical/procedural issues.

IMO, the State has a lot of work to do... which is as it should be.

(Bold is my emphasis)

The plant growth up through parts of the skeleton will show how long the body was there. Hopefully this will convince people that the body was placed there soon after death.

 

[amethyst221]

Based on what we know so far, IMO there is no evidence of premeditation and no evidence that proves that this was murder as opposed to an accident (with or without contributory negligence) and cowardly cover-up. Also, unless there is evidence that the duct tape was applied before death, and/or that Caylee was drugged on a regular basis, or of some other form of aggravated child abuse (specific criteria applies), then I don't see evidence to support felony murder either. So in terms of the key charges against KC, if they don't have such evidence then the case could well be weak.

Contributory negligence? That refers to negligence BY the person injured or killed due to the negligence of another. Certainly you are not suggesting that any of this was Caylee's fault?

If a moron drugs a small child once, and it results in death, there is not an accident happening, but an instance of child abuse.

 

[Devon]

But can't this argument be nullified because Casey 'claimed' her daughter was kidnapped? Once prosecutors show there are NO phone records EVER of Casey speaking with a nanny and then with interviews from people who have NEVER met or even spoken with the nanny it will trump the accident theory. I think that theory could have ONLY worked if Casey would have come clean at some point. If they try to then say accident at trial the fact that she made up this nanny (for YEARS prior to the death of her daughter) that sounds like premeditation to me. She created this fictitious nanny so she could have an out when Caylee went 'missing'.

The nanny story was part of the cover-up, a lie to shift the blame to someone else, but the fact that she has lied her butt off ever since Caylee died IMO does not prove that it had to be murder, rather than an unintentional death by accident/negligence that she is not prepared to accept responsibility for.

 

[Spangle]

I am worried about the fact that the state doesn't have a cause of death.

To me, this is the big one. They will have to plant a picture of the event in the mind of the jury. That will include not only the who, but the how, when, where, and why. The LE will need evidence on each one of those to prove each part of the picture is real.

 

[whiteangora]

I think this is a big one. It may seem simple. But I am afraid Jurors will see a young pretty mother and think she is not capable of such a thing and if she did do it then it must have been an accident.

My husband thinks it is wrong to kill KC - however the other day a man plead guilty to being angry and shaking his baby who later died and my husband immediately said he should get the DP.

How can he think this? In his mind KC seems like an innocent young girl who made a huge mistake.

I don't think Casey will look very pretty to any of the jurors once they hear the horrifying details about how she murdered her baby, went out and partied and told lie after lie to the police.
Anything the defense thinks they have to buffer the truth will be insignificant compared to the evidence the State holds.

 

[Jolynna]

Based on the evidence presented to the public so far...

1. The State doesn't have a cause of death.
2. The State doesn't know where the death occurred.
3. The State doesn't know exactly when the death occurred.
4. The State doesn't have any evidence directly linking KC to the death.
5. The State doesn't have any evidence of prior abuse or history of neglect.
6. The State doesn't have any evidence to suggest KC would be capable (mentally, morally) of coldly murdering her daughter.
7. Several of the State's witnesses (KC's friends) all seemed to turn on her at the same time the media frenzy started, indicating they wanted to distance themselves from her only after the case broke and didn't have issues with her before. This suggests there are other reasons they are all so 'ready' to testify against her, weakening their credibility as character witnesses.
8. KW and DC will both testify that they searched the woods and didn't find a body, which will place some skepticism on claims the body was there since August.
9. Investigators/LE screwed up a few times (eg, additional hairs found in the car, premature/accidental release of jail videos, etc) that may render some forensic and other evidence inadmissible or other technical/procedural issues.

IMO, the State has a lot of work to do... which is as it should be.

Fortunately, there are videotapes of Caylee on Sunday June 15 and Casey minus Caylee on June 16.

Both Casey's and Caylee's demeanors on those days were recorded and are out for all the world to see.

Casey's cell phone addiction is a wonderful bonus for the prosecutors.I think there is a mountain of official record that can't be disputed...like texts and pings. Casey even posed for pictures to prove the witnesses were spot-on about her being her usual bubbly self.

 

[StickPoint]

I don't think Casey will look very pretty to any of the jurors once they hear the horrifying details about how she murdered her baby, went out and partied and told lie after lie to the police.
Anything the defense thinks they have to buffer the truth will be insignificant compared to the evidence the State holds.

ITA. What about the pretty little child that is no longer here on earth? Put that up against that woman, and I see an ugly, selfish, callous woman.

 

[whiteangora]

Based on what we know so far, IMO there is no evidence of premeditation and no evidence that proves that this was murder as opposed to an accident (with or without contributory negligence) and cowardly cover-up. Also, unless there is evidence that the duct tape was applied before death, and/or that Caylee was drugged on a regular basis, or of some other form of aggravated child abuse (specific criteria applies), then I don't see evidence to support felony murder either. So in terms of the key charges against KC, if they don't have such evidence then the case could well be weak.

bold,me
The Grand Jury seems to feel the charges DO support Felony Murder. Keep in mind that their decision was made before the body was found. No worries, the State has their case neatly wrapped with everything they need for a conviction, bringing back the DP is just frosting on the cake.

 

[Devon]

Contributory negligence? That refers to negligence BY the person injured or killed due to the negligence of another. Certainly you are not suggesting that any of this was Caylee's fault?

If a moron drugs a small child once, and it results in death, there is not an accident happening, but an instance of child abuse.

No, of course I meant a degree of negligence on KC's part - sorry if I didn't make that clear. As for the drugging, I think that would depend on what the drug was (i.e. child meds or other), how much was given and why. E.g., if a young inexperienced mother gave her fractious child a spoonful of child med. to get her to sleep, it didn't work so she gave her a couple more, thinking it was okay to do that, and the child subsequently died (fatal reaction/choked on vomit or whatever) that would be negligence, but not really culpable negligence IMO, and possibly child abuse, but not aggravated child abuse, which is the requirement for a felony murder conviction.

 

[NewsHound22]

I think this is a big one. It may seem simple. But I am afraid Jurors will see a young pretty mother and think she is not capable of such a thing and if she did do it then it must have been an accident.

My husband thinks it is wrong to kill KC - however the other day a man plead guilty to being angry and shaking his baby who later died and my husband immediately said he should get the DP.

How can he think this? In his mind KC seems like an innocent young girl who made a huge mistake.

Depending on when this finally goes to trial, lets just see how young and innocent she will look by then.

 

[Devon]

bold,me
The Grand Jury seems to feel the charges DO support Felony Murder. Keep in mind that their decision was made before the body was found. No worries, the State has their case neatly wrapped with everything they need for a conviction, bringing back the DP is just frosting on the cake.

I'm not sure whether they have actually made provision for felony murder or not, because they have not included it as a specific charge, and although they have included a separate lesser charge of aggravated child abuse, they have not claimed that Caylee died because of any such abuse.

 

[Melanie]

I think this is a big one. It may seem simple. But I am afraid Jurors will see a young pretty mother and think she is not capable of such a thing and if she did do it then it must have been an accident.

My husband thinks it is wrong to kill KC - however the other day a man plead guilty to being angry and shaking his baby who later died and my husband immediately said he should get the DP.

How can he think this? In his mind KC seems like an innocent young girl who made a huge mistake.

True, but if she waltzes in everyday laughing, smiling, and waving hellos to family, that would sure peak my interest (as a juror). She better learn how to stop flipping her hair, pulling down her shirt, and throwing pens and joking with her atty's if she wants half a chance. This is serious stuff, yet she continues to act like a flirty 16 year old.

Peace,

Melanie

 

[whiteangora]

I'm not sure whether they have actually made provision for felony murder or not, because they have not included it as a specific charge, and although they have included a separate lesser charge of aggravated child abuse,they have not claimed that Caylee died because of any such abuse.

bold,me
I'm quite certain that the child neglect charges were dropped once the indictment for felony murder came down.
Here are a few of the requirements for a Felony Murder Charge in FL:
ETA, Changed Child abuse charges to Child neglect
DP W/aggravating circumstances. Pick one!

Florida:

(4) The defendant committed the murder after substantial planning and premeditation

(11)The victim of the capital felony was a person less than 12 years of age

(12)The victim of the capital felony was particularly vulnerable due to disability, or because the defendant stood in a position of familial or custodial authority over the victim

(16)The capital felony was a homicide and was committed in a cold, calculated, and premeditated manner without any pretense of moral or legal justification

http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/aggr...nishment-state

 

[CentralFLMama]

My husband thinks it is wrong to kill KC - however the other day a man plead guilty to being angry and shaking his baby who later died and my husband immediately said he should get the DP.

How can he think this? In his mind KC seems like an innocent young girl who made a huge mistake.

Bolding mine. There is no difference in those two things. The *only* difference is that Casey is young and (some would say) attractive. That is ALL.

 

[logic13]

Based on what we know so far, IMO there is no evidence of premeditation and no evidence that proves that this was murder as opposed to an accident (with or without contributory negligence) and cowardly cover-up. Also, unless there is evidence that the duct tape was applied before death, and/or that Caylee was drugged on a regular basis, or of some other form of aggravated child abuse (specific criteria applies), then I don't see evidence to support felony murder either. So in terms of the key charges against KC, if they don't have such evidence then the case could well be weak.

I SADLY AGREE. I have always had a feeling that it could have been an accident. IMO opinion there isn't enough information RELEASED that proves murder...let alone premeditation. ( maybe suggests )

I am hoping for some surprises at trial that will go this direction.. but as it sits, I have a very hard time uttering the words .. WITHOUT A DOUBT.. premeditated murder.

The death penalty has added a whole new wrinkle for me... personally, if I were on a jury for DP.. they would have to have an IRON CLAD case for me to vote to put someone to death. So far, I haven't seen that.

But, who knows... there could be a great bombshell of evidence we have not heard at trial.