If you agree or disagree with the verdict, let us know why

[Baxter]

You're correct, she was responsible for her child. But, hypothetically, if you go to work and you bring your child to a daycare, does that mean you are still 100% responsible for what happens to your child? What if, while in the daycare, your child gets injured... should you be charged with neglect because you weren't watching the child you're responsible for?

And, the jurors didn't overlook that she lied, that is why she was found guilty of it.

You do know that on June 16, 2008, that GA went to work and it is verified by work records, right? The only one with Caylee was CASEY

 

[Sustained]

I am starting to freak out at how many posts are stating that no evidence was presented to show Casey was innocent. That is NOT how our system works. The defendant does not need to prove innocence! The prosecutor has to prove guilt. It would be a miscarriage of justice for someone to be found guilty because no evidence proved innocent. In the minds of those jurors, Casey HAD TO BE PRESUMED INNOCENT, up and until the prosecution proved guilt.....which they did not do.

I totally agree.

I already have been freaking out at the number of people who think there was not enough evidence to find her guilty. And if I had a dollar for every time someone posted that the prosecutor had to prove guilt, I'd be a rich man.

Don't you think us verdict opposers KNOW THAT ???

Oh, and a simple question for you ... would you let FCA babysit your 2-year-old if you had one ? Please take a minute like DCS did on Joy Behar before responding ...

 

[RR0004]

But, IMO, there wasn't evidence of a decomposing body in the car. And, maybe losing my friend to a murderer would put me in some sort of shock and I believed I spoke to my friend (many people speak about seeing/hearing dead loved ones once they're gone).

I'm not suggesting that is what Casey was doing. I am suggesting that just because of those things happened doesn't mean she's a murderer in my book.

...again we (figuratively) go back to what's reasonable...and IMPO...discounting or twisting the evidence to fit an unreasonable scenario...isn't what the jury is supposed to do. I am not sure how much analysis of evidence could have been accomplished in such a short period of time.

 

[cluciano63]

Does anyone know if Casey would of been housed in county jail or prison for a 1-4 year sentence for lying to LE. (had she of not of got time served)

Isn't county for pre-trial and prison for sentenced?

Is county lockdown better conditions? better/closer location than prison?

Prisons are for felony charges, as far as I know. I think she still would have been in some jail and would probably have ended up serving somewhere around 3 years, IMO...

 

[gngr~snap]

Well can somebody please let Cindy know!

CA stated it clearly on her myspace posting. She did everything for Caylee.

Except alert authorities. Per the 1st 911 call, she wanted KC arrested fo Grand Theft Auto and stealing $ not because Caylee was missing!

KC killed Caylee because she was in KC's car NOT the parents.
CA called to have KC arested for "stealing it".
KC could have said Zanny took the car AND Caylee!!!!!

It had been at a tow yard for TWO weeks! She didn't recover it from KC.
CA shows up at TL's apartment and doesn't ask the owner of the apartment if Caylee was there?

nope to hinky. IMO

 

[pcrum12]

KC should have been found guilty of at least manslaughter, though I lean more to aggravated child abuse.

You do realize that manslaughter is "the unintentional, accidental killing of another through carelessness."

http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/clerk/comments/2007/07-2324_Report 12-17-07.pdf

"The negligent act or omission must have been committed with an utter disregard for the safety of others. Culpable negligence is consciously doing an act or following a course of conduct that the defendant must have known, or reasonably should have known, was likely to cause death or great bodily injury."

Doesn't fit.

 

[RR0004]

A different jury a different State, different charges to choose from. Yes 1 peice of hair however it was found in a pair of Pliers in a boat that Lacy was never on.

Caylee's hair or could be Caylee's hair was found in the trunk where it could've been from transfer. The SA also decided to use a new method of testing that had never been used before.

There was a lot more to the SP case in terms of where the body was found and where he said he was fishing on a cold December day. Didn't follow the case much and there may be more but that's all I could remember.

SP & this case have nothing in common except both parties had been convicted before the trial and the hate for both spewed was like nothing seen before.

People have a tough time reconciling the lies of those who have missing loved ones...especially when they accuse the disappearances of their loved ones on imaginary people.

 

[gxm]

I am starting to freak out at how many posts are stating that no evidence was presented to show Casey was innocent. That is NOT how our system works. The defendant does not need to prove innocence! The prosecutor has to prove guilt. It would be a miscarriage of justice for someone to be found guilty because no evidence proved innocent. In the minds of those jurors, Casey HAD TO BE PRESUMED INNOCENT, up and until the prosecution proved guilt.....which they did not do.

And I am shocked at the admittedly few posts that repeat over and over that the defense didn't need to prove anything. I think we all agree the law does not require the defense to prove anything. But if members are going to base their opinion of the verdict on the DT's OS, (accidental drowning, GA's involvement) then they should be prepared to back it up with facts and evidence that supports their opinion. This isn't a courtroom, it's a message board. If you think KC is innocent, explain your position with facts and evidence.

I was specifically asked what "facts" proved that the DT's OS was fabrication. Well, first and foremost, the OS is not evidence (though some appear to believe otherwise). There was never any evidence provided to support the DT's OS, which one would hope they would have provided if they had it. Regardless, whether they needed to show it or not, it was never admitted as evidence. Therefore anyone basing their opinion of the verdict on the OS is not basing their opinion on actual evidence.

The prosecution did prove guilt. The facts prove guilt. The evidence supports guilt. The only people who don't agree seem to be ones who are going with the DT's OS which, I repeat, is not evidence.

FWIW, GA should be presumed innocent too, ya know. What facts were presented that so few seem so willing to convict him on?

 

[gxm]

http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/clerk/comments/2007/07-2324_Report 12-17-07.pdf

"The negligent act or omission must have been committed with an utter disregard for the safety of others. Culpable negligence is consciously doing an act or following a course of conduct that the defendant must have known, or reasonably should have known, was likely to cause death or great bodily injury."

Doesn't fit.

Yes it does. IMO, not calling 911 and dumping the body most definitely fit (with the DT's own fabrication). Please explain why you do not (think this fits).

 

[Sustained]

CA stated it clearly on her myspace posting. She did everything for Caylee.

Except alert authorities. Per the 1st 911 call, she wanted KC arrested fo Grand Theft Auto and stealing $ not because Caylee was missing!

KC killed Caylee because she was in KC's car NOT the parents.
CA called to have KC arested for "stealing it".
KC could have said Zanny took the car AND Caylee!!!!!

It had been at a tow yard for TWO weeks! She didn't recover it from KC.
CA shows up at TL's apartment and doesn't ask the owner of the apartment if Caylee was there?

nope to hinky. IMO

No, she couldn't - GA testified that FCA came home with the car on 6/24. TL testified that he picked up FCA from the Amscot on 6/27. From the Amscot, the car went to the tow yard.

 

[RR0004]

http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/clerk/comments/2007/07-2324_Report 12-17-07.pdf

"The negligent act or omission must have been committed with an utter disregard for the safety of others. Culpable negligence is consciously doing an act or following a course of conduct that the defendant must have known, or reasonably should have known, was likely to cause death or great bodily injury."

Doesn't fit.

IMPO...it does.

 

[RR0004]

No, she couldn't - GA testified that FCA came home with the car on 6/24. TL testified that he picked up FCA from the Amscot on 6/27. From the Amscot, the car went to the tow yard.

Don't forget, Zanny could have had keys...not only to the car...but also to the house.

 

[Sustained]

Don't forget, Zanny could have had keys...not only to the car...but also to the house.

And Amy Huizenga as well as she was moving in with FCA.

 

[RR0004]

Sadly you could count on one hand those who cloaked her in the presumption of innocence.

There were many who held out hope that there was some truth to what Casey said...but that "truth" evaporated (at least for me) on December 11, 2008. Casey created her nightmare...no one else.

 

[TexasLori]

For me, the verdict is wrong.

With the evidence presented we know -

- Casey was the last person seen with Caylee

- She lied for a month about her whereabouts and the whereabouts of Caylee. In the month that she was gone, there were no sightings of Caylee with or without her.

- When CA found her, Caylee was not with her. and Casey lied about Caylee being kidnapped.

- There was decomp in the trunk. The evidence is the smell, the dog hits, and the testing done by Dr. Vass.

- Caylee's remains were found with duct tape on the skull.

For me, this is enough to reasonably come to the conclusion that Casey killed Caylee. I do not need to know if she was drugged or suffocated, or shot with a gun for that matter. I don't care how she did it, she did. I suppose you could come up with another scenario, but for me I have not been able to think of anything that fits all these pieces that is reasonable at all.

Sure you could say that Caylee died by accident and she was put in Casey's trunk by someone else. And then that person or another person removed Caylee and tossed her. And maybe Casey was grieving in her own way those 31 days, and maybe she was afraid of Cindy so she lied......but for me those are not reasonable when put together with the evidence. When I look at the big picture, the only reasonable dots to connect are that Casey killed Caylee, hid her, lied about it, and partied her butt off.

-

 

[kelian36]

CFCA said 31 DAYS...A real grieving mother would have said about 31 seconds ago someone took my child. CFCA said 31 DAYS my child has been missing.
My common sense just on that statement alone would have been enough for me to convicted her of 1st degree murder. She Knew How Many Days Ago She Murdered Caylee PERIOD.

:yourock:

 

[NotRocketSighence]

HUH? How do you prove a negative?

have you seen anything that proved George molested Casey?

It is a FACT that there wasn't one shred of evidence that Casey was ever molested by George. As a matter of fact, it was stated that the only time casey ever mentioned molestation it was pertaining to Lee. The defense did exactly what the poster stated, put George on trial with unfounded and unproven accustations to deflect from casey and the jury bought it all, hook, line and sinker.

JMHO

If we take this out of the Anthony realm for a moment. Many many molestation victims never speak out. Many keep their secret out of fear, shame and a whole host of negative feelings and emotions. One of the biggest is they wont be believed.

Outside of irrefutable DNA evidence which isn't likely after all these years, therapist testimony (doctor patient privileged?) friends you confide in testifying (hearsay?) What exactly other evidence is there to offer? EVEN IF you testify yourself under oath (setting aside your right not to have to testify) it still comes down to he said she said. You say you were, and the father / brother say not.

Back to the Anthonys - What is considered "evidence" ?

 

[pcrum12]

OK, I'm not sure how the gas cans are relevant either, but if GA mowed his lawn between 6/23 - 8/1, he must have used gas from the new cans and bought them prior to them being returned on 6/24. I have seen GA's lawn up close (I live in Orlando) and I can say for sure that he could mow his yard 4-5 times on one tank of gas. It is not a big yard. So it's no big deal that he didn't use the original cans between 6/24 - 8/1.

As far as being evasive on the stand, I would call his testimony careful about being truthful. There were numerous times when JB tried to trick him into saying things that were not true. For instance, after GA denied the affair with RC, JB asked him if he had told RC the "snowball" story while they were intimate. I don't remember the exact verbiage, but there is no doubt that JB was trying to put words in GA's mouth.

The point is that between 6/24 and 8/1 - George actually HAD his old gas cans back from Casey, stated he did NOT use the old cans during that timeframe, but did mow his lawn, stated he didn't buy new cans until after 8/1 when LE took them. Okay, if he didn't use the old cans, hadn't bought the new cans, how did he mow the lawn during that what 5 week period? And, IIRC, he also stated that there was less than an inch of gas in the mower on 6/24.

 

[gladiatorqueen]

And I am shocked at the admittedly few posts that repeat over and over that the defense didn't need to prove anything. I think we all agree the law does not require the defense to prove anything. But if members are going to base their opinion of the verdict on the DT's OS, (accidental drowning, GA's involvement) then they should be prepared to back it up with facts and evidence that supports their opinion. This isn't a courtroom, it's a message board. If you think KC is innocent, explain your position with facts and evidence.

Folks who agree with the verdict have been backing their opinions on this website for weeks. At this point I could probably post a synopsis of why each of those posters agree with the verdict -- I've read them that many times!

I was specifically asked what "facts" proved that the DT's OS was fabrication. Well, first and foremost, the OS is not evidence (though some appear to believe otherwise).

I can assure you that they don't. I certainly don't. Obviously there was enough evidence presented on that theory because the judge allowed the defense to include that in their closing.

 

[kelian36]

I am starting to freak out at how many posts are stating that no evidence was presented to show Casey was innocent. That is NOT how our system works. The defendant does not need to prove innocence! The prosecutor has to prove guilt. It would be a miscarriage of justice for someone to be found guilty because no evidence proved innocent. In the minds of those jurors, Casey HAD TO BE PRESUMED INNOCENT, up and until the prosecution proved guilt.....which they did not do.

The prosecutors proved guilt.

Once again imo........the jurors ignored the states evidence. They rushed to reach a verdict so they could get back to their lives. Their minds were made up before they started discussing a verdict.