"G (Guilty)" vs "NG (Not Guilty)" Where do you stand? #3

[Woe.be.gone]

It is their job to ask questions and try to find Caylee. It doesn't have to be done in the manner that it was done. In fact , they blew it. Now they can't even talk to her.

Why bother? As the Judge stated in the beginning - the truth and KC are strangers - something like that.

 

[Wudge]

I swing back and forth between accident and murder. I think I have to agree with you, that with all we know so far, there may not be enough to convince a jury. With that in mind however, I believe that we have not seen all the evidence and the State will be able to secure a conviction with what is unknown to us at this stage.

There's no direct evidence in this case. Therefore, a verdict must necessarily rest on an inferred conclusion drawn from circumstantial evidence, and the reliability of such a conclusion cannot exceed he reliability of the most reliable item of inculpatory evidence.

However, no inculpatory evidence that we know of has such a high reliability level (proof beyond a reasonable doubt). Thus, premeditated murder cannot be proved from what we know.

 

[thedeviledadvocate]

With regards to the topic of this thread, I still believe Casey is guilty - I'm just not sure if she's guilty by negligence & Caylee died, if Caylee died form an accident & Casey panicked so hid her, or if Casey truly murdered her daughter. I haven't seen enough evidence to show me that she 100% murdered her daughter. I'm still not privy to the rest of the evidence that prosecutors have.

So far, from what I've seen, I'm just not sure and anticipate a flat out war in court. Caylee was made into the poster child for abuse & missing advocates. Our entire country, as well as parts of the rest of the world, want answers and justice. Michael Baden & Henry Lee disected every bit of forensic evidence in the OJ case. Baden said something interesting that still sticks with me til this day. He said "OJ was found Not Guilty. They never said he was Innocent. They just said he was found Not Guilty.". He also went on to saying that it's not the burden of the defense to prove the defendants innocence, it's up to the prosecution to prove guilt. He said the law should be followed in all aspects of crime scene evidence gathering. One of the reasons OJ got off was b/c of a dna mixup in the lab. Another reason was b/c the initial officers on the scene didn't wear full protection, including shoe covers, and their footprints were found in the blood splatter of Ron & Nicole. He said cross-contamination can get a person off faster than anything. This is one reason Linda Baden takes on DP cases - b/c she doesn't believe, as well as her team of experts, that a DP should be warranted if proper protocol & procedure wasn't followed from the beginning. IOW, if you don't prove pristine conditions during gathering of evidence, and if it's not technologically proven that a murder took place (meaning have it on film or camera or eye-witnessed), then a lesser sentence should be considered. This is what I worried from since the beginning.

One thing I don't know, if you could please help this jerseygirl out, could Casey be sentenced to a lesser penalty if the jury wants to do that? If this is a dp case, that is if the prosecution is going after the dp, could she be found not guilty or murder but maybe negligence or manslaughter and receive a lesser sentence? I thought that wouldn't be possible, since of what her charge is. She's charged with murder, not manslaughter. So I thought it would be all or nothing. This is what I fear. Little Caylee is dead b/c of her mother, in one way or another. She should pay a price for that. But what happens if she's found not guilty of murder? Could the jury lay down a different penalty if there's no charge of manslaughter? I thought that was only up to the police & prosecutors.

Like you, I'm not 100% sure if it was murder, or an accident. It is my opinion that the state does not have enough evidence that we know of that can prove premeditated murder. I do not know the legal answers to your question but would like to know the answers, what if she is found not guilty (does she then walk and can't be charged because of double jeopardy). Can the jury lay down a defferent penalty if there's no charge of manslaughter? I don't know hopefully one of the legal minds in here can explain.

 

[Wudge]

I swing back and forth between accident and murder. I think I have to agree with you, that with all we know so far, there may not be enough to convince a jury. With that in mind however, I believe that we have not seen all the evidence and the State will be able to secure a conviction with what is unknown to us at this stage.

My experience is that as a case moves ever closer to the start of the trial, the evidence released by the State favors the defense moreso than the prosecution (like the syringe).

 

[Rlaub44]

As for the evidence we know of, in my opinion the state has yet to prove Casey is guilty of premeditated murder. In the evidence we know of, the FBI reported that the duct tape on the remains was dissimilar to the duct tape on the gas can. DNA from an FBI tech inadvertantly ended up on one of the most important pieces of evidence in this case. While I admire the FBI for admitting this error, and I do believe it was unintentional, it still bothers me that a mistake was made on such a critical piece of evidence. In my interpretation of the entomologists report, I think he proved the LE theory was possible. In my opinion, however, he also left the door open that, it is also possible Caylee's remains were never in the trunk. Also, in my opinion, the fact that the white trash bag was in or near a dumpster for several hours, leaves a reasonable possibility that the white trash bag could have been contaminated by insects from within and around the dumpster, that could give false results to the entomology report. Again in my opinion, Roy Kronks inconsistant testimony to LE, the fact that no saw what Roy Kronk saw prior to Dec 11th, coupled with my interpretation of the experts reports, that it is possible (although unlikely) that the remains may have been placed in the woods after Aug 15th. In my opinion, the smell in the trunk may have been from the white trash bag. Many have the opinion it was the smell of death cuased from Caylee's remains being in the trunk for 2.6 days, we are all
entitled to our opinions, mine just happens to be it was the smell of the trash bag in an enclosed trunk under the hot Florida sun for over two weeks.. The computer forensics, the cell phone pings, and the chloroform evidence all seem to prove LE's theories in these areas may be possible. However, they do not rule out other reasonable possibilities. Even if Casey lied to LE, and showed very inappropriate behavior for someone whose child was missing for 31 days, these two things do not prove she murdered her child. There are many 22 year old girls who are liars, self-serving, party animals, that may be promiscuous, and at odds with their parents. None of this can be translated into that 22 year old being a murderer, even if her daughter was missing for 31 days and she didn't report it. The defense claims Casey has a complelling reason for the 31 days. Many people choose to no acknowledge this at the moment since it is not in evidence. I choose to think there may yet be a compelling reason for this behavior to be introduced by the defense. I do not equate writing bad checks, or using someone else's credit cards to being a murderer. The wild goose chase to Universal, the Zanny story, the sawgrass apartments, all show Casey may well be a liar. None of these things prove she is a murderer. Many believe LE's theories are correct and believe the way they interpret the evidence we know of in totality, this gives them the opinion of GUILTY. I understand this, and each of us are entitled to an opinion. My opinion is Casey cannot be found GUILTY of premeditated murder based on the evidence we know of. I base this opinion on the totality of my interpretation of the evidence we know of.

I wanted to thank you for the effort you put into this post. I have told you this before, but I feel it bears repeating: you and I may disagree on what the evidence shows, but I greatly respect you and the way you thoughtfully explain your reasoning.

We need people in the NG camp who can give us something to think about, so that we may examine our own beliefs and decide for ourselves. This forum gains nothing when the minority opinion is represented by posters who claim that KC never lied and that LE is less trustworthy than she is, or posters who repeat the same off-topic drivel ad nauseum, or who misstate facts despite having the documentation shown to them numerous times.

I hope that you feel welcome here, even though your viewpoint may not be held by everyone else, because I really enjoy reading your posts, and I feel that you are truly looking for the truth in this case, not just to disrupt threads and be contrary for contrary's sake.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts with us.

 

[marspiter]

Like you, I'm not 100% sure if it was murder, or an accident. It is my opinion that the state does not have enough evidence that we know of that can prove premeditated murder. I do not know the legal answers to your question but would like to know the answers, what if she is found not guilty (does she then walk and can't be charged because of double jeopardy). Can the jury lay down a defferent penalty if there's no charge of manslaughter? I don't know hopefully one of the legal minds in here can explain.

Yes if Casey is found not guilty of the actual murder one charge she can not be tried again.

However she does have other charges that will end up putting her away for awhile just not the big one.

Also a jury can select a lesser charge such as second degree or the like.

Then you have the wild card....felony murder. With felony murder it's the same statute as murder one but with the premeditation removed from the elements of the charge. She is charge with Aggrevated Child Abuse which would be the felony conducted for felony murder to take place. She does not need to be charged with Felony Murder for the Prosecution to ask for it. It is also part of the Florida jury instructions.

I hope that answers the question. If one of our legal minds would like to chime in.

 

[Wudge]

Like you, I'm not 100% sure if it was murder, or an accident. It is my opinion that the state does not have enough evidence that we know of that can prove premeditated murder. I do not know the legal answers to your question but would like to know the answers, what if she is found not guilty (does she then walk and can't be charged because of double jeopardy). Can the jury lay down a defferent penalty if there's no charge of manslaughter? I don't know hopefully one of the legal minds in here can explain.

Double jeopardy is attached to not guilty verdicts.

 

[Wudge]

Yes if Casey is found not guilty of the actual murder one charge she can not be tried again.

However she does have other charges that will end up putting her away for awhile just not the big one.

Also a jury can select a lesser charge such as second degree or the like.

Then you have the wild card....felony murder. With felony murder it's the same statute as murder one but with the premeditation removed from the elements of the charge. She is charge with Aggrevated Child Abuse which would be the felony conducted for felony murder to take place. She does not need to be charged with Felony Murder for the Prosecution to ask for it. It is also part of the Florida jury instructions.

I hope that answers the question. If one of our legal minds would like to chime in.

The State has not charged Casey with 2nd degree murder. Thus, the jury could not even consider it much less find Casey guilty of that crime.

FWIW

 

[coco puff]

I agree with you on all points, except, I'm not certain the state will be able to secure a conviction with what is unknown to us at this stage. In my opinion, if the state had anything more convincing than what is already showing they would have put it out there.

People keep saything that if the state had any more evidence, they would release it. Think about the last doc dump? They had that info for months, but since it was requested, they had to release it to the public. In my opinion, they have plenty and I will be back to quote myself when the next doc dump comes!

 

[darnudes]

My experience is that as a case moves ever closer to the start of the trial, the evidence released by the State favors the defense moreso than the prosecution (like the syringe).

Probably just wishfull thinking on my part.

 

[marspiter]

The State has not charged Casey with 2nd degree murder. Thus, the jury could not even consider it much less find Casey guilty of that crime.

FWIW

Florida Jury Instruction:

7.1 INTRODUCTION TO HOMICIDE

Read in all murder and manslaughter cases.
In this case (defendant) is accused of (crime charged).

Give degrees as applicable.
Murder in the First Degree includes the lesser crimes of Murder in the Second Degree, Murder in the Third Degree, and Manslaughter, all of which are unlawful.

A killing that is excusable or was committed by the use of justifiable deadly force is lawful.

If you find (victim) was killed by (defendant), you will then consider the circumstances surrounding the killing in deciding if the killing was (crime charged) or was [Murder in the Second Degree] [Murder in the Third Degree] [Manslaughter], or whether the killing was excusable or resulted from justifiable use of deadly force.

JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDE
§ 782.02, Fla.Stat.

The killing of a human being is justifiable homicide and lawful if necessarily done while resisting an attempt to murder or commit a felony upon the defendant, or to commit a felony in any dwelling house in which the defendant was at the time of the killing.

EXCUSABLE HOMICIDE
§ 782.03, Fla.Stat.

The killing of a human being is excusable, and therefore lawful, under any one of the following three circumstances:

1. When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune in doing any lawful act by lawful means with usual ordinary caution and without any unlawful intent, or

2. When the killing occurs by accident and misfortune in the heat of passion, upon any sudden and sufficient provocation, or

3. When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune resulting from a sudden combat, if a dangerous weapon is not used and the killing is not done in a cruel or unusual manner.

Definition.
"Dangerous weapon" is any weapon that, taking into account the manner in which it is used, is likely to produce death or great bodily harm.

I now instruct you on the circumstances that must be proved before (defendant) may be found guilty of (crime charged) or any lesser included crime.

Comment

For complete instructions on self-defense, if in issue, see 3.6(f), (g).

This instruction was amended in 1990 [573 So. 2d 306], 1992 [603 So. 2d 1175], and 1994 [639 So. 2d 602].

Wudge it may be a good idea to read through these.

 

[marspiter]

Wudge here is a link to the Florida jury instructions in Florida. It's pretty good reading material.

http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/jury_instructions/instructions.shtml#

 

[Wudge]

Florida Jury Instruction:

7.1 INTRODUCTION TO HOMICIDE

Read in all murder and manslaughter cases.
In this case (defendant) is accused of (crime charged).

Give degrees as applicable.
Murder in the First Degree includes the lesser crimes of Murder in the Second Degree, Murder in the Third Degree, and Manslaughter, all of which are unlawful.

A killing that is excusable or was committed by the use of justifiable deadly force is lawful.

If you find (victim) was killed by (defendant), you will then consider the circumstances surrounding the killing in deciding if the killing was (crime charged) or was [Murder in the Second Degree] [Murder in the Third Degree] [Manslaughter], or whether the killing was excusable or resulted from justifiable use of deadly force.

JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDE
§ 782.02, Fla.Stat.

The killing of a human being is justifiable homicide and lawful if necessarily done while resisting an attempt to murder or commit a felony upon the defendant, or to commit a felony in any dwelling house in which the defendant was at the time of the killing.

EXCUSABLE HOMICIDE
§ 782.03, Fla.Stat.

The killing of a human being is excusable, and therefore lawful, under any one of the following three circumstances:

1. When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune in doing any lawful act by lawful means with usual ordinary caution and without any unlawful intent, or

2. When the killing occurs by accident and misfortune in the heat of passion, upon any sudden and sufficient provocation, or

3. When the killing is committed by accident and misfortune resulting from a sudden combat, if a dangerous weapon is not used and the killing is not done in a cruel or unusual manner.

Definition.
"Dangerous weapon" is any weapon that, taking into account the manner in which it is used, is likely to produce death or great bodily harm.

I now instruct you on the circumstances that must be proved before (defendant) may be found guilty of (crime charged) or any lesser included crime.

Comment

For complete instructions on self-defense, if in issue, see 3.6(f), (g).

This instruction was amended in 1990 [573 So. 2d 306], 1992 [603 So. 2d 1175], and 1994 [639 So. 2d 602].

Wudge it may be a good idea to read through these.

The State has charged Casey with both murder one and manslaughter but not murder two. Obviously, that was done intentionally.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

That was classic KC! She had a new person in the room, and she reverted right back into the story she just admitted was a lie two minutes previously. :waitasec: Didn't matter that the new person was LE, or that the other officers would be stepping right back into the room momentarily, or that it was all being taped, she just went right back to talking about her fake phone in her fake office.

I have a feeling Notthatsmart can set us straight on this. Maybe it was a conspiracy by Universal. Maybe they wrote a script where KC was forced to "lie" and say she really didn't have an office there. Maybe Universal is really Zanny!!! I think I've solved it! :takeabow:

That's the ticket! KC left Caylee at Universal (the Nanny for the day) so the two year old could enjoy the rides and entertainment. After "work", when KC returned to pick Caylee up, Caylee neglected to show up at their meeting spot. KC ran over to BP to see if Caylee may have walked on over there. When KC could not find Caylee there, she kept waiting day-after-day for Caylee to return home. Afterall, it's not KC's fault if someone took Caylee from Universal - geesh! KC attempted to solve this mystery herself and was hoping for the best. What's wrong with you people? Don't you know a good script when you read one?

Sadly, KC's real script is about as farfetched as the one above. :doh:

 

[marspiter]

The State has charged Casey with both murder one and manslaughter but not murder two. Obviously, that was done intentionally.

Maybe so I have no idea why the state charge Casey the way they did, but what does that have to do with your statement that Casey can't be found guilty of murder 2?

The instructions are pretty clear and your statement was wrong about the jury not being able to consider murder 2.

Pretty much a can they or can't they answer. The answer is they can.

 

[ZsaZsa]

Like you, I'm not 100% sure if it was murder, or an accident. It is my opinion that the state does not have enough evidence that we know of that can prove premeditated murder. I do not know the legal answers to your question but would like to know the answers, what if she is found not guilty (does she then walk and can't be charged because of double jeopardy). Can the jury lay down a defferent penalty if there's no charge of manslaughter? I don't know hopefully one of the legal minds in here can explain.

Frankly, you have NO idea what the State does or does not have in the way of evidence.... yet. Only snippets, courtesy of the Sunshine Law. They are confident enough of their case to ask for the death penalty- they just haven't shared with you all the details.

 

[LambChop]

I still have not heard any information regarding evidence that shows KC as being innocent on this thread as yet. I see alot of statements regarding how some feel the evidence in their opinion does not prove guilt but that is based on their opinion only. Have not seen anyone's opinion who feels KC was guilty changed by the NG opinions posted here. The only thing I have noticed is how passionate the guilty posters feel compared to the somewhat detached postings of some of, but not all, of the NG postings. Almost like some of my college professors. Maybe I am wrong, just my opinion.

 

[Wudge]

Maybe so I have no idea why the state charge Casey the way they did, but what does that have to do with your statement that Casey can't be found guilty of murder 2?

The instructions are pretty clear and your statement was wrong about the jury not being able to consider murder 2.

Pretty much a can they or can't they answer. The answer is they can.

Prosecutors selected but murder one and manslughter for a specific reason; i.e., they do not want the jury to be given a murder two option.

 

[Rlaub44]

The State has not charged Casey with 2nd degree murder. Thus, the jury could not even consider it much less find Casey guilty of that crime.

FWIW

Florida Jury Instruction:

Murder in the First Degree includes the lesser crimes of Murder in the Second Degree, Murder in the Third Degree, and Manslaughter, all of which are unlawful.

A killing that is excusable or was committed by the use of justifiable deadly force is lawful.

If you find (victim) was killed by (defendant), you will then consider the circumstances surrounding the killing in deciding if the killing was (crime charged) or was [Murder in the Second Degree] [Murder in the Third Degree] [Manslaughter], or whether the killing was excusable or resulted from justifiable use of deadly force.


Wudge it may be a good idea to read through these.

(Above post respectfully snipped for space)

The State has charged Casey with both murder one and manslaughter but not murder two. Obviously, that was done intentionally.

I agree that the charges were not arrived at by accident.

As marspiter pointed out in response to your erroneous first post I quoted, the fact that she was not explicitly charged with Murder Two does not preclude the jury from considering that charge during deliberations.

You know this very well, yet you continue misrepresenting this fact. Then when it is again pointed out, you change the subject as in your second post I quoted.

May I ask, so that none of us needs to repeatedly relink this information, that in future please do not continue to state that jurors may not consider Murder Two, as it is now clear that they absolutely can. Thank you.

 

[thedeviledadvocate]

Frankly, you have NO idea what the State does or does not have in the way of evidence.... yet. Only snippets, courtesy of the Sunshine Law. They are confident enough of their case to ask for the death penalty- they just haven't shared with you all the details.

I agree, I do not have any idea what the state has in way of evidence, other than what we know of courtesy of the Sunshine law, which is what I based my opinion on.