For those who agree with the verdict...help me understand.

[beccalecca1]

I don't understand.
What do narcissism and sociopathy fall under? Personality flaws. ?
I just dont understand what draws the line at true mental illness.
I know that Schziophrenia is a mental illness and can be somewhat treated with meds.
I still think they shouldve done a brain scan on KC. She definately doesnt seem right. I think she knows the difference between right and wrong though.
To me, Ted Bundy, Aeileen Wornos and Jeffrey Dahmer definately had brain problems. Its is not normal to stalk brown haired women and kill them and ts not right to eat human body parts:sick:
But is also not right to dump your baby in a swamp and say she accidently drowned. :banghead:

IMO, the difference between mental illness and personality disorders is when there is an actual malfunction in the brain that causes whatever symptoms you have... it's considered mental illness (schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, anxiety disorders, etc.) If what you have are just abnormal personality traits, it's not an actual mental illness, they're just disorders of your personality (OCD, narcissism, sociopath, etc.)

And, I'm curious why you added Aileen Wuornos to you list between Ted Bundy and Jeffery Dahmer. She didn't stalk women or eat people. She first killed men out of her hatred for being abused while growing up by older men. When she became a prostitute, it brought back a lot of her old feelings that she bottled up. After her first kill and stealing the money/cars/etc... she killed out of survival. She was a serial killer of a different kind. I think she's in a class all on her own.

 

[linda505]

Since it has come out that the SA knowingly allowed false evidence to be presented in the trial - doesn't this throw a big wedge in the motion to recoup costs of the investigation?

 

[beccalecca1]

So Joe says the verdict was not guilty because the defense hand picked the jury to not include republicans, entrapeneurs, retired police officers or NRA members. :floorlaugh:

I guess ole Joe forgot that the prosecution is also an active participant in jury selection, and both sides have an equal number of strikes. If no "Joe-qualified" jurors are left after that, it simply means there are not enough proportionally in the general population (probably much to his shock )

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

 

[Chablis]

Or consider this: regardless of whether or not LDB knowingly allowed perjury, she and JA knew that the jurors could eventually be deliberating the DEATH PENALTY using false information. Pfft

And people should be screaming for justice. Can you imagine if the State was trying to kill you saying you used chloroform to kill your child and they used evidence that was wrong and they knew it? Can Jose sue the State for this?

 

[beccalecca1]

BBM Yep, he is a very skilled Attorney. He did an excellent job with the expert witnesses on both sides.

I like that only part of that sentence is bolded... I'll go ahead and bold the rest of what I said "..because he chose to put words into their mouths.

 

[HatesSociopaths]

IMHO, there is a difference between the judge's orders of using only the evidence presented in a courtroom, and your gut. The DNA evidence assumed to be so damning, was gone. There were so many lies in that family and household - no one knew who actually did the internet searches. Could have been any of them.

It makes me sick that she got away with murder. SICK. But as for what the jurors job was - it was to use the EVIDENCE presented in the courtroom. And because of all the lies and the decaying body - the evidence did not weigh.

Casey should have been proven not innocent. Or perhaps different charges, with different thresholds brought against her. But as it stands, she was simply "not proven" guilty. and because of double-jeopardy, she can't be tried again for the same crime.

Shameful.

The jury failed to use common sense. They were shown that a dead baby was thrown in the swamp in a garbage bag, obviously a murder. They then refused to look at how all the lies pointed to FCA. No DNA was needed here. A brain was needed.

 

[jjenny]

And people should be screaming for justice. Can you imagine if the State was trying to kill you saying you used chloroform to kill your child and they used evidence that was wrong and they knew it? Can Jose sue the State for this?

Considering KC's mother testified she was the one doing these searches to begin with, what do you think Jose can sue the state for?

 

[dunlurken]

Prosecution failed to prove Casey murdered her daughter. That's it in a nutshell. And they overcharged! I've often wondered why AF was asking each and every prospective juror if they could give Casey death.

What a fiasco of a case, and the jury came back with the correct verdict based on the evidence or lack thereof.

"If it doesn't fit, you must acquit".

 

[Chablis]

Considering KC's mother testified she was the one doing these searches to begin with, what do you think Jose can sue the state for?

So because ts Casey, no one cares that the State may have used a botched piece of evidence to prove their point?

 

[GhostCrab]

And people should be screaming for justice. Can you imagine if the State was trying to kill you saying you used chloroform to kill your child and they used evidence that was wrong and they knew it? Can Jose sue the State for this?

She has a very good case against the state that they violated her civil rights.

 

[cluciano63]

I know I might look up how to make chloroform if my boyfriend was posting jokes about it online and I had suspicions about whether or not he had used it on me. And I might even delete it after I looked it up. Just saying.

 

[HatesSociopaths]

Jury had plenty of evidence, just not enough common sense.


http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSI_effect

 

[dunlurken]

I know I might look up how to make chloroform if my boyfriend was posting jokes about it online and I had suspicions about whether or not he had used it on me. And I might even delete it after I looked it up. Just saying.

You can delete it, but it's still on your hard drive.

I'm still trying to figure out why LDB kept saying 84 searches when there was actually one for chlorophyll. But the guy who "owned" /created the hardware said it malfunctioned? I ain't buying that.

 

[dunlurken]

Jury had plenty of evidence, just not enough common sense.


http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSI_effect

Respectfully disagree. I held my opinion in abeyance to see what the evidence would be. At the end of the trial I still had what I consider reasonable doubt.

 

[cluciano63]

I posted a Supreme Court decision someplace last night, that upheld a decision to vacate a murder conviction with a death penalty due to Jeff Ashston withholding evidence from the defense, in 1999. Defendant won a new trial. So this kind of thing does happen and even by Ashton. Eventually the man was retried and convicted again, but that is not really the point, at least not to me...it shows a willingness to stoop to the levels that the defense has been blasted for all along...
(Also Judge Perry was the judge who initially decided that the defendant right to a fair trial had been violated, FWIW.)

 

[askfornina]

Considering KC's mother testified she was the one doing these searches to begin with, what do you think Jose can sue the state for?

i have said this recently in another thread but i will say it here. i really don't think cindy can reasonably be blamed for the searches in any way whatsoever. it was made very obvious that she lied about searching for chloroform but she never, never stated that she searched for "how to make chloroform" so the entire "cindy did the searches" thing is just moot.

 

[cluciano63]

The jury failed to use common sense. They were shown that a dead baby was thrown in the swamp in a garbage bag, obviously a murder. They then refused to look at how all the lies pointed to FCA. No DNA was needed here. A brain was needed.

You know, some posters here agree with the verdict, if not for the same reasons some of the jurors are talking about, and you really don't need to be insulting anyone and everyone who happens to agree that the state did not prove their case.

 

[Chablis]

Jury had plenty of evidence, just not enough common sense.


http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSI_effect

Yeah, one search from months ago and air samples from a cleaned out aired out trunk logically says, someone killed their child with chloroform.

What was the State thinking?

 

[askfornina]

I posted a Supreme Court decision someplace last night, that upheld a decision to vacate a murder conviction with a death penalty due to Jeff Ashston withholding evidence from the defense, in 1999. Defendant won a new trial. So this kind of thing does happen and even by Ashton. Eventually the man was retried and convicted again, but that is not really the point, at least not to me...it shows a willingness to stoop to the levels that the defense has been blasted for all along...
(Also Judge Perry was the judge who initially decided that the defendant right to a fair trial had been violated, FWIW.)

very interesting! if you find the link you should post it here

 

[cluciano63]

very interesting! if you find the link you should post it here

http://www.law.fsu.edu/library/flsupct/sc96216/96216ans.pdf