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

[Oakley]

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--

:applause::applause::applause::applause::applause: Me thinks we have a new post of the decade.

 

[FORDANIEL]

You are wrong, but I assume you already know that and just enjoy this little dance. For the people who actually want to know the answer as it pertains to this specific case and state I have posted specific statutes, jury instructions, supreme court rulings, and case examples.

Have been following this thread for weeks--am afraid to comment--must say that this thread is WOW just WOW-- hope this thread is still open after the trial.Can lurk here all day--have friends looking over my shoulder--for weeks,great insights they all have . BTW I have been called to JD== the list of attire ok in Southern AZ--where it is very hot,is not even close to the attire allowed in the courtroom in FLA ,amazing simply amazing!!!:croc:

 

[Wudge]

I asked that because you said:

"Check your statutes.

IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA a death penalty case requires the jury be instructed that they can find the defendant guilty of a lesser charge."


If it is 'required' (I take that to be a requirement for every such case), then I would like to read that statute.

Bumping request to a new page.

 

[Just Jayla]

So this has nothing to do with Caylee or KC,it has to do with your interest in posting against high profile cases.And when you say "in my experience" repeatedly,posting against said cases is what you are referring to.I'm glad you shared this with us,because it explains so much .

Look at the bright side, if we were not so close to the truth here at WS, no one would care what we write here....we are an attractive bunch for substantive discussion and spot-on information (providing links, careful consideration and thorough vetting of ideas).
If we were nothing but a feeding frenzy, there would be nothing of substance, just perpetual arguments, and serious true-crime sleuthers would have moved on.
Instead, we are lawyers, doctors, chemists, housewives, authors, police officers, etc. with a lot of combined brain power, and we are well moderated.
There is a lot that can be learned from us, you know.

 

[LandAuxvasse]

I am not an expert on the law or forensics or really much of anything LOL.

That said, if I were on the jury and the evidence the SA has released in discovery to date was presented to me at trial and the defense said something like, "We don't believe the SA has proven guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and therefore rest our case", then I would have to bring back a guilty verdict.

Also, if the defense just kept telling me that the forensics was junk science and I should therefore find Casey not guilty, I would have to bring back a guilty verdict based on the evidence released in discovery to date.

However, having NOT heard the defenses side of the case, I cannot say guilty or not guilty. I cannot understand the science of the forensics and would have to rely on the testimony of experts to explain it to me. I do believe that between examination and cross examination I would be able to determine which expert I would most likely believe or agree with. I also believe I'm intelligent enough to decide whether a particular piece of evidence is relevant or not. I do not believe that just because the SA says the evidence proves guilty therefore she is. However, if there are experts that can explain why the evidence does not say guilty, I am willing to listen and learn... and no, an expert would not tell me that the science is junk I believe we're way past that!

 

[MissJames]

Caylee's, and LE certainly did not serve Caylee very well. I think if they would have been nice, perhaps they could have found out other things over the next couple of weeks to help them to perform a top notch investigation. Since they have been guessing now for a year, it does not surprise me that the reports are not panning out in their favor. This is another good reason for me to come to the NG side, is that LE could have done a much better job from the beginning.

MISSING CHILDREN DON'T HAVE THE LUXURY OF WAITING A COUPLE OF WEEKS TO BE FOUND!:banghead:
If they aren't already dead they are being abused,sexually assaulted,possibly tortured.Then they are usually killed.The urgency for LE was heightened because Caylee had already been gone for 31 days.
LE doesn't have to guess.They got their info despite the obstruction of KC ,Cindy,George and Lee.
If someone breaks into your home and assaults you and steals your possesions who are YOU going to call?

 

[impatientredhead]

Bumping request to a new page.

I told you what thread to find the answer to your question.

 

[notthatsmart]

nts-I can appreciate you trying to get to the truth using alternative theories. The problem is that when you put your theorize out there you must include the evidence already confirmed by forensic es and the FBI. I won't include LE since I get the feeling that you don't trust OCSD. Caylee's decomposing body was in Kc's car trunk that is a fact. There was a strand of hair that had a death band that was Caylee's in the car trunk that was confirmed. The duct tape that covered Caylee's tiny little face has been linked back to the A's through the gas can. The type of this duct tape is so rare that is certainly the same roll. The Whitney design clothing bag that was found in the A's garage is the same brand and color that caylee's little body was disposed in. The garbage bag handle's are the same color of handle's that the A's were using during that time period. Caylee was wearing a shirt and shorts that a photo was taken of her wearing. Her pooh blanket and pink blanket was found at the dump sight that she used to snuggle with at home. Her mom searched chloroform,neck breaking,killing with household chemicals while everyone else in that house was at work. Then to top it all off, when no on knows for sure where sweet Caylee is on June 16 in the evening, KC is arm and arm with TL at Blockbuster renting movies. There is a lot to try and disprove. I wish you luck. But a SO or another perp will be hard to find. Because if a So took by daughter I would not wait 31 days to report her missing just so I could stay with my new boyfriend. Good luck wit your search and if I can help please let me know.

Bold one: There is no proof of that. That is not a fact.
Bold Two: Not confirmed. Fbi Email says can not confirm human decomp.
Bold Three: Fbi report said fabric didn't match. Consistent with coming from a different source.
Bold four: I would expect things from her home to be there. She did live there of course.
Bold Five: They don't know who performed that search if indeed the search happened.
This is another reason why I lean not guilty. There are many false reports out there.

 

[impatientredhead]

Just as an aside for those interested the Florida courts have recently (two weeks ago) finished a review and amending of the instructions given at the penalty phase of the trial.

I will save you the effort Wudge and point out in advance these are the instructions provided for the penalty phase and not the requirement to consider lesser charges which occur in the preceding phase. But given the thread topic I figured many readers would be interested in the recent changes to this portion.

http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/decisions/2009/sc05-960.pdf

The first area of disagreement is the majority‘s decision to decline to adopt the Steering Committee‘s recommendation mandating the use of a new capital case verdict form in the guilt phase. That form would have required the jury to state how many of the jurors found the defendant guilty of first-degree murder based on premeditation and how many jurors found that the murder was committed in the course of a felony, with that felony clearly identified.

Shorter version can be found here:

http://www.floridabar.org/DIVCOM/JN/jnnews01.nsf/8c9f13012b96736985256aa900624829/9ce06193c2ea095685257663006ee804!OpenDocument

 

[Wudge]

I told you what thread to find the answer to your question.

I have no idea what staute you are, allegedly, basing this alleged "requirement' on. And I'm certainly not going on a wild goose thread hunt.

All I asked for was the exact statute or a post of yours that referred to which statute. That question should be easy to answer if you are correct.

I don't know that your claim is true or that it is not true, but I now doubt that it is true. If you want credit, provide the statute or, better yet, quote the statute as well.

 

[Just Jayla]

Bold one: There is no proof of that. That is not a fact.
Bold Two: Not confirmed. Fbi Email says can not confirm human decomp.
Bold Three: Fbi report said fabric didn't match. Consistent with coming from a different source. Bold four: I would expect things from her home to be there. She did live there of course.
Bold Five: They don't know who performed that search if indeed the search happened.
This is another reason why I lean not guilty. There are many false reports out there.

Valhall found some great information and posted on the duct tape (somewhere in this forum!) information and linked directly to LE docs...In short, the difference between the tape came down to thread of white cotton that ran through the gas can tape vs. no white cotton thread in the decomposed tape.
As has been stated by LE, the cotton portions of Caylee's clothing had degraded, as I would also imagine this cotton thread in the duct tape would have, making the two tapes a match.
FBI has also stated that they feel the tape is a match and that the adhesive is the same. That stuff is all linked in the duct tape threads...
You can slice and dice the language of the FBI docs and find some "may be's" and "likely's," which is fair game, but the FBI also frequently reminds the state that it is not their job to boslter the state's game plan, only to provide scientific findings. So the tentative language seems appropriate for a party that does not (should not) have an agenda.
JM stinky O.

 

[Wudge]

Just as an aside for those interested the Florida courts have recently (two weeks ago) finished a review and amending of the instructions given at the penalty phase of the trial.

I will save you the effort Wudge and point out in advance these are the instructions provided for the penalty phase and not the requirement to consider lesser charges which occur in the preceding phase. But given the thread topic I figured many readers would be interested in the recent changes to this portion.

http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/decisions/2009/sc05-960.pdf

The first area of disagreement is the majority‘s decision to decline to adopt the Steering Committee‘s recommendation mandating the use of a new capital case verdict form in the guilt phase. That form would have required the jury to state how many of the jurors found the defendant guilty of first-degree murder based on premeditation and how many jurors found that the murder was committed in the course of a felony, with that felony clearly identified.

Shorter version can be found here:

http://www.floridabar.org/DIVCOM/JN/jnnews01.nsf/8c9f13012b96736985256aa900624829/9ce06193c2ea095685257663006ee804!OpenDocument

Thank you. However, at this time, I'm not interested in what changes are proposed or underway in the penalty phase. I'm interested in what statute contains your alleged lesser charge 'requirement' (as discussed in prior posts).

 

[cecybeans]

Well, the OJ jury bought the idea that at 99.9% dna match was somehow "reasonable doubt". But they were in Hollywood and OJ was a famous, beloved sport and movie star.

Here we are dealing with a lazy, spoiled liar and petty thief of a girl who has pretty much universally disgusted the world with her behavior, her cold attitude toward her family and lack of affect regarding her child. She and her baby wouldn't have even made it into the news if her child had not disappeared. (I guess we can thank her relentless lies for helping to catapult her into fame, unlike that wanna-be in CA who finally 'fessed up that her missing baby was a hoax).

Furthermore, the citizens of the state of FL are a bit sick of their taxpayer money going to preserve the fiction that she and her family have created of an Imaginanny who abudcted Caylee, and the interminable delay her attorney has created so that his fees can be paid, or her family can create a livelihood, based on selling pictures of a dead child or offering "exclusives" to the media as if they are stars.

I really don't think a Florida jury will be in the mood to think that the carefully gathered evidence is "junk science" or that the odds the above evidence points anywhere else is even the slightest bit reasonable. There is going to be no starstruck jury parsing through scientific terminology, thinking that all the above are simply "coincidences" or that they point in any direction other than KC.

 

[Kentjbkent]

Oh, great post. Wouldn't that be great to watch!
Dr Baden stated, on Fox News - a long time ago- way before Caylee was found, that Police DID know the identity of the father. The interviewer asked only how they knew and Dr Baden said by DNA testing. The interviewer did not ask him to elaborate and he said no more. He did not say- A B and C were excluded by DNA- he definitely said that LE knew who he was. I am hoping the father will soon know that too.. :dance:

Just finished reading the chapter in DF book where Dr Baden is a guest on Greta and is discussing the hairs found in the trunk that LE believed resembled Caylee's and they had been sent off to lab.

Dr Baden stated that the hairs would tell LE (through DNA) who the father of Caylee was, as well as whether the child was alive or dead when placed in the vehicle.

So much information out now, has a report been released on the hairs and a determination of a living or deceased Caylee placed in trunk? And is this why Dr Baden has virtually disappeared from this case???

 

[flourish]

Look at the bright side, if we were not so close to the truth here at WS, no one would care what we write here....we are an attractive bunch for substantive discussion and spot-on information (providing links, careful consideration and thorough vetting of ideas).
If we were nothing but a feeding frenzy, there would be nothing of substance, just perpetual arguments, and serious true-crime sleuthers would have moved on.
Instead, we are lawyers, doctors, chemists, housewives, authors, police officers, etc. with a lot of combined brain power, and we are well moderated.
There is a lot that can be learned from us, you know.

:applause::applause::applause:

One of those "thanks isn't enough," "bears repeating" kinda posts!

 

[Kentjbkent]

I have to disagree with this. In every case I've followed, when it comes time for the trial, there's always been new information presented by the prosecution that wasn't made public prior to the trial.

Not only that...as I have stated previously, when it comes time for trial, we will also being hearing from expert witnesses to discuss and opinion the various reports, lab findings, etc that we are seeing now (with no explanation) and in which we are trying to speculate what they reflect.

The evidence we HAVE seen will be much more clear and understandable when explained by a person deemed as an "expert" in that particular field.

 

[notthatsmart]

Valhall found some great information and posted on the duct tape (somewhere in this forum!) information and linked directly to LE docs...In short, the difference between the tape came down to thread of white cotton that ran through the gas can tape vs. no white cotton thread in the decomposed tape.
As has been stated by LE, the cotton portions of Caylee's clothing had degraded, as I would also imagine this cotton thread in the duct tape would have, making the two tapes a match.
FBI has also stated that they feel the tape is a match and that the adhesive is the same. That stuff is all linked in the duct tape threads...
You can slice and dice the language of the FBI docs and find some "may be's" and "likely's," which is fair game, but the FBI also frequently reminds the state that it is not their job to boslter the state's game plan, only to provide scientific findings. So the tentative language seems appropriate for a party that does not (should not) have an agenda.
JM stinky O.

Thank you for this comment. I agree that Fbi appears to be impartial. I found it interesting that the shorts were 100 percent cotton and still in tact.

 

[Wudge]

Just finished reading the chapter in DF book where Dr Baden is a guest on Greta and is discussing the hairs found in the trunk that LE believed resembled Caylee's and they had been sent off to lab.

Dr Baden stated that the hairs would tell LE (through DNA) who the father of Caylee was, as well as whether the child was alive or dead when placed in the vehicle.

So much information out now, has a report been released on the hairs and a determination of a living or deceased Caylee placed in trunk? And is this why Dr Baden has virtually disappeared from this case???

His wife is a member of the defense team.


(How stupid do you think he is? ... chuckle)

 

[Kentjbkent]

His wife is a member of the defense team.


(How stupid do you think he is? ... chuckle)

Actually, if memory serves me correctly, he appeared first on NG stating he was hired as the expert for the defense team BEFORE his wife joined the team.

Then he changed his tune about his opinion (more pro-pros) on a few future visits to NG, then poof.....gone.

My thinking....he examined the car with Dr Lee, decided he couldn't offer any help to defense so told wife she had a better shot it at! (j/k)

 

[TorisMom003]

His wife is a member of the defense team.


(How stupid do you think he is? ... chuckle)

Are you saying that he would in some way not be honest because of his wife being a member of the defense? I really do not understand the purpose of this post.