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

[cecybeans]

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:

LMAO - yeah, KC's got a load of b.s. only a mother could love...but frankly, if my own daughter even tried to tell whoppers like those, I'd refuse to embarrass myself by pretending I believe such hilarious hogwash. I used to tell her all the time, it's not just about being innocent, it's about managing the perception. If you don't hand in your homework all the time and give silly excuses, you are not managing the perception that you even do it, and that is something that is also your responsibility. Be innocent, and make sure you convey that with your actions; don't blame others for how you are perceived. Obviously something CA never taught her own daughter because she does not practice it herself.

 

[RR0004]

I think the reason they were so aggressive was that they were looking for Caylee and had no idea what kind of danger she was in and they needed KC to break FAST. You would think the MOTHER OF THE YEAR would have WANTED LE to find Cayle and told the truth. Only the killer and a guilty party would have a reason to lie. I was so surprised they were not more thrreatening. The fact that KC was not afraid or emotional during this questioning proves what an evil cold person she really is.

Nope...not afraid...she just "uh huh(ed)" through the whole interview.

Maybe there is something off about me, but I didn't think they were all that aggressive.

 

[RR0004]

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.

...or bored law clerks.

 

[cecybeans]

...or bored law clerks.

:floorlaugh:

or bored interns...

 

[LambChop]

This would actually be a good forum for a law student to get their feet wet. Wonder if Ms. Lyons has thought about that?????

 

[marspiter]

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.

Once again kind of a moot point it's right there in black and white in the jury instructions.

Who knows why the SA charged Casey the way they did. Perhaps they were only going to originally charge her with manslaughter then after further evidence came back they decided on Murder one. There is all kinds of reasons for her to be charged the way she is.

It still doesn't negate the FACT that the jury instructions say what they do.

So once again your statement about the jury not being able to consider second degree murder is wrong, incorrect, false, not accurate, ect, ect.

 

[Wudge]

(Above post respectfully snipped for space)



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.

The State does not want Casey charged with murder two, and, as best I know, there is no evidence that proved Caylee died because Casey acted with a depraved mind but without intent to kill. Moreover, the defense is certainly not going to request a murder two charge (chuckle) given the existence of the manslaughter charge (lesser than murder two).

I have no idea where people get the notion that the trial Judge has the power to unilaterally charge Casey.

 

[Wudge]

Once again kind of a moot point it's right there in black and white in the jury instructions.

Who knows why the SA charged Casey the way they did. Perhaps they were only going to originally charge her with manslaughter then after further evidence came back they decided on Murder one. There is all kinds of reasons for her to be charged the way she is.

It still doesn't negate the FACT that the jury instructions say what they do.

So once again your statement about the jury not being able to consider second degree murder is wrong, incorrect, false, not accurate, ect, ect.

Where does it say the trial Judge can set the charges of their own volition?

 

[RR0004]

Notthatsmart, you crack me up. :floorlaugh: I can see you now, gazing thoughtfully at your monitor, drumming your fingers, trying to decide what you can say next to really rile everybody up. And it works every time! :floorlaugh:

I, however, have raised 7 grown children, and I know how to tell when someone is yanking my chain. LOL Furthermore, although your avi is a nice touch, it's also a dead giveaway that you want to create an illusion of stupidity. People who truly believe they aren't smart do not announce it to the world; they do the opposite. But what really gives you away is that you tend to use a very nice, intelligent turn of phrase right in the midst of an otherwise utterly incongruous statement.

I have to hand it to you, though--there are a lot of extremely smart people here and you're smart enough to keep them running around in the same circles, banging their heads against the walls, trying to understand you and help you understand them. LOL The truth is, you have such a genius for it, I almost hate to out you. :blowkiss:

If I've totally, completely, thoroughly guessed wrong about you, then all I can say is, "Well, nuts." And, "Okay, you vote Not Guilty. I get it. I respect it. No further explanation necessary, no argument forthcoming."

Regards--

Ah...I think you'd be surprised as to how many got on the ride knowingly and are rather enjoying it all the same.

 

[marspiter]

The State does not want Casey charged with murder two, and, as best I know, there is no evidence that proved Caylee died because Casey acted with a depraved mind but without intent to kill. Moreover, the defense is certainly not going to request a murder two charge (chuckle) given the existence of the manslaughter charge (lesser than murder two).

I have no idea where people get the notion that the trial Judge has the power to unilaterally charge Casey.

The Judge is not unilaterally charging Casey.

It's in black and white right there in the jury instructions plain as day.

One can argue water isn't wet all day long if they never have to prove their argument with evidence and citation.

I have proven mine with such.

 

[cecybeans]

This would actually be a good forum for a law student to get their feet wet. Wonder if Ms. Lyons has thought about that?????

I imagine she has. Just the change in KC's courtroom appearance since she arrived on the scene is reason enough to think so - it has been tweaked in ways that are directly related to many comments on line.

I think an intern or two would also be posted at the forensic sites - we have some formidable sleuthers here that probably save a cash-strapped defense a lot of time and money in deciphering scientific or computer jargon. I wouldn't imagine that this intern would be gauche enough to actually post, though. That would be too unprofessional.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

And I will say with all that being said, they lost Casey at that point. I don't think they should use that tactic in that situation. It was a bad decision on their part and that makes me question their ability to find the truth. These are some of the reasons I believe she is NG.

Oh please - KC should have welcomed any help she could get from LE to find her "missing" child. Didn't KC thank CA for calling the police? I seem to recall CA mentioning KC's gratefullness to her for performing that deed.

LE is not in the business of solving riddles - imo. Grab your batphone Robin and let's go see if we can sort out the lies of our "victim".

 

[QB.]

Ah...I think you'd be surprised as to how many got on the ride knowingly and are rather enjoying it all the same.

fair enough. I did continue to read along knowingly.

 

[wonders]

Quote:
Originally Posted by marspiter
Once again kind of a moot point it's right there in black and white in the jury instructions.

Who knows why the SA charged Casey the way they did. Perhaps they were only going to originally charge her with manslaughter then after further evidence came back they decided on Murder one. There is all kinds of reasons for her to be charged the way she is.

It still doesn't negate the FACT that the jury instructions say what they do.

So once again your statement about the jury not being able to consider second degree murder is wrong, incorrect, false, not accurate, ect, ect.

Where does it say the trial Judge can set the charges of their own volition?

Colored By Me
Wudge, where did you get your question from what marspiter posted?

 

[Wudge]

The Judge is not unilaterally charging Casey.

It's in black and white right there in the jury instructions plain as day.

One can argue water isn't wet all day long if they never have to prove their argument with evidence and citation.

I have proven mine with such.

If neither the State nor the defense were to request the addition of a murder two charge but the Judge were to add it, that would be a unilateral decision.

HTH

 

[LambChop]

Ah...I think you'd be surprised as to how many got on the ride knowingly and are rather enjoying it all the same.

Yep, buckle up!! As I said before there is information brought up now that I had forgotten about. Some of the legal issues are but I believe not everyone in the Judical System of Orange County are negligent. In particular, the ME's office. No horse in the race for her, for sure.

 

[notthatsmart]

Are you sure you listened to the same interview that I did? Are you suggesting that LE should have booked a table at the Ritz prior to conducting their line of questioning? I'm not following you and disagree with your view regarding the treatment that KC received from LE.

By the way, have you watched the movie "slumdogmillionaire" per chance?
Therein you can find examples of unkind interrogation practices.

Yes I have listened several times. I also went back and read it. It was clear to me that she was trying to help them out, but they would not have it. They just kept throwing accusations at her. I would not expect them to take her to the Ritz. I would expect them to continue to ask questions nicely so they can continue to interview her over a couple of weeks. They did not get any information what so ever by doing it in this manner. I can understand it because LE was doing 90 percent of the talking. And may I ask, how does that help to find Little Caylee? Why not just ask questions and listen.

yeah I saw the movie. That is Hollywood, not real life.

 

[ZsaZsa]

I imagine she has. Just the change in KC's courtroom appearance since she arrived on the scene is reason enough to think so - it has been tweaked in ways that are directly related to many comments on line.

I think an intern or two would also be posted at the forensic sites - we have some formidable sleuthers here that probably save a cash-strapped defense a lot of time and money in deciphering scientific or computer jargon. I wouldn't imagine that this intern would be gauche enough to actually post, though. That would be too unprofessional.

Hmm - I wonder- doesn't appear that Miss Lyons has read all the comments 'out there' that she is the one who really needs a makeover...:innocent:

 

[marspiter]

Wudge posting this again because I think you missed it. You have said before you don't see every post.

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].

 

[ZsaZsa]

Yes I have listened several times. I also went back and read it. It was clear to me that she was trying to help them out, but they would not have it. They just kept throwing accusations at her. I would not expect them to take her to the Ritz. I would expect them to continue to ask questions nicely so they can continue to interview her over a couple of weeks. They did not get any information what so ever by doing it in this manner. I can understand it because LE was doing 90 percent of the talking. And may I ask, how does that help to find Little Caylee? Why not just ask questions and listen.

yeah I saw the movie. That is Hollywood, not real life.

Whose needs do you think should come first during that interview.... Casey or Caylee's