GUILTY GA - Rusty Sneiderman shot to death at Dunwoody preschool, 18 Nov 2010 #5

[tezi]

Too be clear, the all agreed on premeditation, they just couldn't come to an agreement on felony murder, which is probably a blessing in disguise.

Yes, they did. For that, I was thankful.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Who has primary custody of the kids now? And is there a hearing set up for any custody matters?

 

[MeeBee]

You're probably right gitana. Hemy was convicted of being mentally ill. Getting a jury to take his word for it would be a huge challenge. Also, I read that the reason the state dropped the charges was because the defense turned over a deposition that changed their minds. Is it possible that Hemy was deposed and said something (like he acted alone) that all but forced them to drop the charges?

Also, re: CA: it's a shame the state didn't find the "full proof suffocation" searches in time, since, even without it, that search seems to jel with the prosecution's theory of how Caylee was murdered.

Although, you have to wonder, since the jury just did not follow instructions and seemed bent on acquitting her.

 

[tezi]

Yes. Usually, people wait with such cases because a person facing criminal charges in connection with such a case cannot be compelled to answer questions via discovery or at a trial, regarding the death.

I want to say something here, though. I do not believe that she will ever be charged again with murder. They just didn't have enough and I don't know that Hemy's words in the future would be enough. Any defense attorney would have a field day with the testimony of that character.

However, AS knows the truth and she has to live with the truth of her character and her soul, for the rest of her life. And when bad people die who have done bad things they never were held accountable for, nor ever repented of, they go screaming into death, filled with fear and not an ounce of peace.

I think AS at the least, knew the murder was going to occur. She is going to face justice for that in some manner.



Not to derail the thread, but I don't believe, as an attorney familiar with evidence, that casey anthony was a bit overcharged. There was strong evidence that she premeditated the death of her child.

I think the state was a bit too confident, though and thus slipped over some necessary evidence, such as evidence that casey needed to get rid of Caylee, in her mind, in order to be free and be with her new guy, unfettered, who really didn't want a young child around.

I also think they were hampered by some of the judge's rulings, like the exclusion of cindy anthony's myspace posting and most especially, the sequestration of the jury. That sequestration amounted to punishment, IMO.

Regardless, even with the failures and the detrimental rulings, the state presented enough for a finding of premeditated murder.

But don't take my word for it. How about a judge's?: Judge Perry has been a judge since 1989. That's 24 years. Frankly, I'm kind of surprised that so many lay people feel they would know more about what was proved and what casey anthony was guilty of, than a judge! :angel:

gitana, I don't ever disagree with your opinions when it comes to the legal stuff. What I meant was, I think that the state was over-confident in what they thought they had proven to the jury. I agree, she was guilty of murder. Totally. I also agree with the punishment aspect of the sequestration. She should have been found guilty of child neglect resulting in death, at the very least. I just didn't word it as well as I could have. I hope that makes sense...

 

[Hez]

Scarlett, I am glad you are here and appreciate your healthy dose of skepticism. It's always good to question and I like how you stick to your guns rather than going with the crowd.
The difference here, is that we all got our information from the trial as it was progressing, along with many outside sources that were linked to we readers. It's not really up to us to change your mind. That should come from YOU watching the evidence that was presented during the trial.
For you to come in after it is all over, without watching the entire trial - and second guessing our opinions is sorta .......disrespectful.
I wish you would watch the entire trial and maybe read some of the links readers provided here on this thread. I think your arguments would hold more weight, and be more respected.
Keep on keeping on, friend. You are an asset to WS.

BBM - It is also second guessing the jury's verdict, which is what matters the most. Especially since they found her guilty of 9 of 13 charges and took their time while deliberating the evidence. I think if the jury was basing their verdict on emotions, they would have found her guilty on all charges, last Thursday or Friday (right after they got the case). I'm just not sure what the debate is any more. She was charged with hindering an investigation, concealing material facts and perjury, and was found guilty. If a conspiracy to committ murder charge comes at a later date, so be it. It won't be because of emotions, it will be because there is evidence to support that charge and the prosecution feels they can prove it beyond a reasonbable doubt. I think if the prosecution would have left murder on the table for this case, then you could make a case for it being based on emotions and not evidence, but that isn't what happened here.

 

[katiedid2]

Hi all, just watched the video before AS was taken into custody. That was down right CREEPY! Her legal team with all those long hugs and holding on. Very uncomfortable to watch icky. Jmo

Ciao

Wow! Glad I'm not the only one that found that totaly bazaar. Clegg was even crying. She hugged them so tight as she did shayna citron. That realy creeped me out totaly.

 

[katiedid2]

Yep, that would have been a slam dunk.

ETA: You should have warned me about that post you made. I now have Coca-Cola all over my desk. Because I thought that same exact thing yesterday....LOL

JMO

Lol great minds think alike.

 

[Roy23]

gitana, I don't ever disagree with your opinions when it comes to the legal stuff. What I meant was, I think that the state was over-confident in what they thought they had proven to the jury. I agree, she was guilty of murder. Totally. I also agree with the punishment aspect of the sequestration. She should have been found guilty of child neglect resulting in death, at the very least. I just didn't word it as well as I could have. I hope that makes sense...

Gitana,

I agree with a lot you are saying on this case. Word on the street here in Dunwoody is that some pretty compelling evidence not concerning Hemy's statements shed some new light on how the prosecution had to look at this case. From what I gather, Andrea broke it off and Hemy killed him as last resort. And I am willing to bet that Hemy told her that is what he would do if she broke it off. Not sure about that. But folks don't care much for cheaters around here so Andrea had to stick to her story and still does even though most of those character witnesses had to do a double take after James closing.

 

[tezi]

Lol great minds think alike.

LOL, now that is one thing I have never been accused of, having a great mind!

Just funnin' with you!

AS is a bizarre person, that is for sure...LOL

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I think if we all just keep ourselves to what is going on in the thread we are in and leave other issues other places we will all do better.

I am not saying anyone's opinion is less. I look often to certain posters here for their opinion to see how they feel about things. It helps me because I know that these people are diligent with evidence and facts.

I like to hear other opinions even if I don't agree. It helps me look at that side of it and see how that fits in the way I believe something happened.

To me debating an issue in a case is not personal. It is completely a fact finding mission and I just look at it as another way to work the case.

I don't take it personally if someone does not agree with me.

I don't have bad feelings about any one here and I don't think that because you think differently than me you are not right. I just need to work from where I feel good about how it sits for me. I can not just take the leap to where others see it just because more people see it that way. I like to make up my own mind and I like to do it so that I don't second guess myself later.

I have no hard feelings at all here. I hope that goes the same for everyone.

 

[SmoothOperator]

Well, I was under the impression that we were specifically talking about the affair.

The murder is trickier but for me, I don't know how else to explain it. Andrea was vehement that she found out at the hospital, yet on the way to the daycare she informed two people that Rusty was shot and called her family and Rusty's family when the extent of the info she was supposed to have at that time was "something bad happened." All this after calling Hemy four times. Then she arrives at the school acting like a lunatic. Again,p with very limited info.

Now she has a friend that is willing to poke some holes for her and I suppose the defense opened it up to the possibility that Andrea found out before the hospital. It still doesn't explain her testimony. Or her actions. Let's assume the defense made a point.

She finds out on the phone. She arrives at the school and collapses in an officer's arms.

Then she finds out inside and slides out of her chair.

Then she finds out again at the hospital and she slides out of her chair again.

All that falling and grandstanding and each time she finds out she acts like it's new info. That's assuming she did find out before then, which she says she didn't. Her friend who testifed that she was told that Andrea found out at the daycare had previously said Andrea confided in her that she found out at the hospital. Did she suddently remember that important bit of info?

When police arrived to search her home, the Sneiderman's wanted to let them in. Andrea refused as did her parents. Who does that if they don't have anything to hide in the wake of her husband's murder.

It's a puzzle. And I never said that points to her being definitively complicit in the murder. But what other conclusion is there?

Yes, MeeBee you are correct in that the OP that many replied to was STRICTLY regarding an affair and that there wasnt any proof of a physical affair.. The subject and subsequent discussion was pointing out that there was evidence that proved the affair, as many of us mentioned, objective, unbiased evidence..

The debate was regarding there being evidence of the affair..NOTHING AT ALL ABOUT MURDER OR
PROVING MURDER.

As you, much more eloquently than I, stated above the subject of murder and whether or not murder was proved is something totally different and unrelated to the issue and discussion of the affair..

In terms of murder being proved, as in Andrea being proven as having been involved in Rusty's murder..

There was no murder trial..there was no attempt to introduce evidence of Andrea's involvement in the murder and I have seen no one claim it as fact that there's evidence proving she's involved.

Two totally different subjects and it is ONLY the subject of the affair that was being debated as having been proven..

 

[MeeBee]

Yes, MeeBee you are correct in that the OP that many replied to was STRICTLY regarding an affair and that there wasnt any proof of a physical affair.. The subject and subsequent discussion was pointing out that there was evidence that proved the affair, as many of us mentioned, objective, unbiased evidence..

The debate was regarding there being evidence of the affair..NOTHING AT ALL ABOUT MURDER OR
PROVING MURDER.

As you, much more eloquently than I, stated above the subject of murder and whether or not murder was proved is something totally different and unrelated to the issue and discussion of the affair..

In terms of murder being proved, as in Andrea being proven as having been involved in Rusty's murder..

There was no murder trial..there was no attempt to introduce evidence of Andrea's involvement in the murder and I have seen no one claim it as fact that there's evidence proving she's involved.

Two totally different subjects and it is ONLY the subject of the affair that was being debated as having been proven..

I actually think you said it much better than I did, lol. Yes people are speculating on the nature of her complicity, but I have not seen anyone throwing it around as fact or something that needs to be proven because there's no clear evidence, just conjecture.

So when people bring up the facts, and the evidence, and how that all points to Andrea's guilt, and we get, "but that doesn't prove murder," that's where it's breaking down. I feel it's a way to detract from the actual issue at hand which is the affair. The original argument was, "I see no evidence of an affair, you people are not going on facts," and when clear facts were presented to why people took that leap, a reluctant concession that we had a point was offered but it's still getting buried under, "that doesn't prove murder," claims. Of course it doesn't. The complicity to murder is another matter but it doesn't seem that much of a stretch for people to "take that leap" based on the facts and the evidence and the crimes for which Andrea was convicted.

 

[Zinvestigator]

That is about as well said and honest post as i have ever read here. Kudos!

I respect your right to your opinions and beliefs and would never challenge that. I just feel you’ve had a thrashing from other WS posters and although I agree with some of their views, they should respect yours. Whether it’s right or wrong isn’t relevant, it’s your view and you should be allowed to express it without others ganging up on you.

 

[nightwatch]

Wow! Glad I'm not the only one that found that totaly bazaar. Clegg was even crying. She hugged them so tight as she did shayna citron. That realy creeped me out totaly.

Has anyone here ever seen lawyers line up to give these type of client interaction in the courtroom? Seems to me AS was putting on a show, but for who?

Ciao

 

[tezi]

I actually think you said it much better than I did, lol. Yes people are speculating on the nature of her complicity, but I have not seen anyone throwing it around as fact or something that needs to be proven because there's no clear evidence, just conjecture.

So when people bring up the facts, and the evidence, and how that all points to Andrea's guilt, and we get, "but that doesn't prove murder," that's where it's breaking down. I feel it's a way to detract from the actual issue at hand which is the affair. The original argument was, "I see no evidence of an affair, you people are not going on facts," and when clear facts were presented to why people took that leap, a reluctant concession that we had a point was offered but it's still getting buried under, "that doesn't prove murder," claims. Of course it doesn't. The complicity to murder is another matter but it doesn't seem that much of a stretch for people to "take that leap" based on the facts and the evidence and the crimes for which Andrea was convicted.

Exactly. We were going on the facts though, as did the jury.

I do feel that AS didn't do enough to stop HN. I think she knew what he was probably capable of doing to Rusty. But, my feelings don't matter, and I guess we will see if the state does ever bring the conspiracy to commit murder charge against AS.

And thank you MeeBee for stating it better than I could.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Did the prosecutor give any hint to murder charges in the future in his interview?

And has the wrongful death suit actually been filed or have they just stated intent to file?

 

[MeeBee]

Did the prosecutor give any hint to murder charges in the future in his interview?

And has the wrongful death suit actually been filed or have they just stated intent to file?

The suit was filed a while ago.

I think the prosecutor didn't really want to talk about it but I read somewhere else that they have no plans to bring the murder charges back.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

The suit was filed a while ago.

I think the prosecutor didn't really want to talk about it but I read somewhere else that they have no plans to bring the murder charges back.

Is there a date for the suit?

Thanks. I can not figure out how to thank from the updated app.

 

[tezi]

The suit was filed a while ago.

I think the prosecutor didn't really want to talk about it but I read somewhere else that they have no plans to bring the murder charges back.

I think that's is going to depend on the outcome of HN's appeal. And what he has to say afterward. CarolinaMoon made an excellent post about that on this thread.

 

[LaLaw2000]

Oh, she won't enjoy the Big House, that's for sure. I am pretty sure she will immediately separate herself from the rest of the immates. Cry at night, and pretend the uniform gives her rashes. Oy vey!

The princess and the pea (under the mattress!). I predict AS will have major problems with other inmates. The inmates will resent someone who feels so privilaged and snotty. Within one month AS will have some kind of write-up, IMO. As much as she loves to talk, she will not be able to keep herself from saying the wrong thing to the wrong person!

AS will have to find someone to protect her from the other meaner inmates, lol.
Sorry if that is mean of me to say, but AS will have to come to terms with her new reality, IMO.

* I need spell check!