REVISIT Does LE have enough evidence to Convict Casey on 1st Degree Murder?

[Devon]

You need to know that the death occurred as the result of a criminal act. We do not know that. We can suspect it, but no forensic evidence was found (so far) that shows how Caylee died. If she drowned in the pool, for instance, and Casey just plotted to hide the body and blame it on someone else, that is not First Degree.

I haven't read any toxicology reports--could have missed them, but they've not been released to my knowledge---that would prove that Caylee had been drugged. Those reports may be coming, and hopefully we will hear soon.

It is true that Casey was arrested very early on and it is clear LE believes this is a murder. However, their evidence is not air-tight as of this point, and there are MANY loop-holes. The prosecutor has yet to take his case before a jury, and he may well decide to go for charges he KNOWS he can get a conviction for if the evidence stays at the level it is now. And I don't think the prosecutor would be certain of a conviction of first degree murder.

I totally agree and have been saying all along that the evidence we have seen so far does not support a first degree murder charge. I also recall the ME stating that the toxicology tests on Caylee's hair were not expected to yield any evidence of how she died, hence the cause of death being categorised as 'by undetermined means'. Unless the duct tape (or some other evidence found at the disposal site) can be shown to have been used to deliberately kill Caylee I'm not sure how they are going to prove murder1.

I think KC was charged with this in the expectation that she would either crack and confess to whatever did happen, or that Caylee's body would be found soon enough to yield sufficient proof to support the charge. Since neither of these events happened, I personally think they will have a difficult job proving their case unless more direct evidence comes to light. I also suspect that this may be the reason why they are delaying the trial and that there may be some negotiations on a plea deal at some point, but that is strictly IMO.

 

[kathyn2]

One thing that could really really cinch the prosecution case is if that bottom with the white substance floating in it proves to be some sort of poisonous substance and that the syringe has remnants on it AND KC's prints were on the bottle or the syringe. We haven't heard anything about that evidence yet. I hope that puts the nail in her coffin.

 

[MomofBoys]

You need to know that the death occurred as the result of a criminal act. We do not know that. We can suspect it, but no forensic evidence was found (so far) that shows how Caylee died.

There have been others convicted, though, where cause of death was never determined.

You have a three year old girl with no known major health problems, whose decomposing body was transported in a trunk, and who had duct tape over her mouth.

My question is, at what point can the jury turn their suspicions into assumptions?

Of the three criteria listed for 1DM under Florida law, we know that Caylee is deceased. That's an easy one. The duct tape speaks strongly to a premeditated criminal act.

People can say the tape was to stop leakage, but if KC doesn't come clean, that's no more plausible than a gagged Caylee being murdered by her mother.

Without the context of the truth, doesn't the tape speak more loudly than anything else? KC could have disposed of her daughter's "accident" but she's never said anything of the sort. It's a bigger assumption to give her the benefit of the doubt than to look at the facts. Children aren't gagged after a drowning. Children who drown are typically rushed to the hospital, regardless of the futility of the trip.

I pray to God I'm never faced with a dead body, and I can't know the circumstances that would allow someone to tape their loved one's tongue back into their mouth. All I know is that if you were to present this case to me in a bubble, the duct tape is HUGE. I mean, yes, the rest of it is compelling, but that's what escalates this from a cinch Murder 2 or manslaughter to a very plausible Murder 1 conviction.

At least with the current line of defense strategy.

 

[kathyn2]

Don't listen to the naysayers here that think there is not enough evidence to convict her. There is mountains of evidence and way more than many cases where there has been a conviction. Scott Peterson is sitting on death row for goodness sakes with 1 little hair in a plyers from the woman he lived with. David Westerfield is sitting on death row with a partial fingerprint of the victim in his camper where he claimed she went in and played. Not much else tied him to any crime and they had been in his home and he in their's. This case will be a cinch for the prosecution. I have never seen so much evidence in a case before!

 

[bogeygal]

Don't listen to the naysayers here that think there is not enough evidence to convict her. There is mountains of evidence and way more than many cases where there has been a conviction. Scott Peterson is sitting on death row for goodness sakes with 1 little hair in a plyers from the woman he lived with. David Westerfield is sitting on death row with a partial fingerprint of the victim in his camper where he claimed she went in and played. Not much else tied him to any crime and they had been in his home and he in their's. This case will be a cinch for the prosecution. I have never seen so much evidence in a case before!

ITA, and truly feel there will be a conviction in this case. If however, the remote chance that doesn't happen, we know she still has to face the theft and fraud charges which would lock her up for a very long time. So, big prison time is very likely for KC.

I rest my case! :behindbar

 

[trixi491]

This may be kind of a stupid question but when comparing this case to the OJ Simpson case which do you think has more evidence of guilt? I was pretty young during the OJ case so I don't really remember what the circumstantial and forensic evidence was. Do you think if Casey got off it would be as big of a shock (if not bigger) than OJ?

 

[smart blonde]

This may be kind of a stupid question but when comparing this case to the OJ Simpson case which do you think has more evidence of guilt? I was pretty young during the OJ case so I don't really remember what the circumstantial and forensic evidence was. Do you think if Casey got off it would be as big of a shock (if not bigger) than OJ?

This is a great question, in no way a stupid one!
While I must admit I am not qualified to answer it, I will say that that trial haunts me in regards to Casey Anthony's impending trial.
I personally believe there is enough evidence to convict Casey of 1st Degree Murder, but the O.J. Trial is a reminder to me that all it would take is one juror to find reasonable doubt...
I remember the O.J. Trial well, and a conviction seemed like a 'slam-dunk'.
Just the thought of that happening in Casey's case makes me feel ill.

 

[songline]

The defense really doesn't have to do very much. The onus is on the prosecution to prove guilt. All the defense has to do is throw out ANY reasonable doubt (or facsimile thereof!) and pray one juror buys it.

Part of the burden the prosecution is facing is that they must PROVE Caylee was murdered. If they expect to get a first degree sentence, then they must also prove that Casey caused the death through her own criminal act, AND that the murder was premeditated.

It's so easy for us to sit here and read the evidence (one side of it, at that!) and conclude that Casey is guilty. (I think she is guilty, even though I can see dozens, maybe HUNDREDS of holes in the evidence!) But we don't all agree on WHAT she is guilty! Is it murder? Is it first degree? Second degree? Negligent homicide? Just negligence? Is she guilty of failing to report a death and orchestrating a coverup? We don't know what evidence is going to make it into the courtroom and what will be blocked. We do know the jury will be expected to render a verdict based ONLY upon what evidence is presented during the trial.

If the defense sticks to the "nanny took her!" defense, then they obviously are going to pin the blame of the death of Caylee on her sitter, too. She wasn't just kidnapped, she was kidnapped and murdered. In that case, I would think they would hope to get a "not guilty" to all charges at any level. (Not that I can see that happening.) They would be contending that Casey had NOTHING to do with Caylee's or death.

I'm going to go way out on a limb here and make a little kgeaux prediction. Jose Baez will not be the defense attorney by the time Casey walks into her trial. He will have been replaced by someone bigger, better and much more experienced. And when someone else steps into those shoes, we will not hear a "nanny did it" defense.

editing to add: I enjoy chatting with you, Chilly. I've been so busy that I don't get to spend as much time here as I would like to, but I always look for your posts when I'm here!

I do not think Casey will ever talk. she must have learned from LE Dad long ago that the first person who speaks loses, and that silence is golden.
She must have learned from Mom to make up stories to get them off her back.

I agree with you that JB may be replaced because he is not storng enough and because he has som of his own problems with the Bar Association which is not a good thing.

here is a link to today's news
The case against Casey Anthony: Do the pieces add up?

<SNIP>
"At this point ... this is a dogfight. This is not a slam-dunk for the state," said Charles Rose, a professor at Stetson University College of Law near St. Petersburg
<SNIP>

http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news...casey-anthony-evidence-022609,0,1156694.story

 

[songline]

This is a great question, in no way a stupid one!
While I must admit I am not qualified to answer it, I will say that that trial haunts me in regards to Casey Anthony's impending trial.
I personally believe there is enough evidence to convict Casey of 1st Degree Murder, but the O.J. Trial is a reminder to me that all it would take is one juror to find reasonable doubt...
I remember the O.J. Trial well, and a conviction seemed like a 'slam-dunk'.
Just the thought of that happening in Casey's case makes me feel ill.

ME TOO, I think there is a possibility that one juror would come up with reasonable doubt, that is why I hope they can TIE casey to Caylees demise. I am not so sure that having everthing pointing at Casey is enough.
It does all point at Casey, and I hope they will find that one link that will tie her to it.
There is an article right above this one that seems to agree with my thinking that it is no slam dunk.
IMO the strength of the case against her are:
31 days not reported,
She goes out to party,
Car smells like a dead person,
Tape on baby with a Sticker on the tape.
THAT is a lot.

 

[Hot Dogs]

Related news article by Orlando Sentinel...


The case against Casey Anthony: Do the pieces add up?

A hair, a laundry bag, some duct tape and a strange odor in the car. Throw in a mother who lied to investigators and showed little concern for weeks that her 2-year-old daughter had disappeared.

Since Casey Anthony became the prime suspect in the disappearance — and eventual death — of her daughter Caylee Marie, prosecutors have released thousands of pages of evidence in their case against her.

But does the case, with its countless morsels of evidence, truly link the 22-year-old Orange County mother to Caylee's remains?

The Orlando Sentinel asked a handful of legal experts about some of the evidence released so far. They predict a difficult case for both sides.

 

[sarah7855]

I think they have enough for a conviction.

They arrested her even before Caylee was found. That is extremely rare, it means they thought they had enough for a conviction at that time. Since her arrest they found Caylee's remains and even more evidence. So yeah, I think they will have more than enough.

Exactly, they had enough before she was found to go in front of the GJ and get a 1st degree murder charge in 30 mins. We have no idea what all they have, but logic tells you that it's powerful!

 

[SoSueMe]

Do you think LE has enough evidence to get Casey on 1st Degree Murder?

Yes I think LE has enough evidence for 1st Degree Murder. They have a plethora of circumstantial evidence, which KC can't refute because she won't testify. She is a known liar and jurors tend to not believe liars.

Sue

 

[kgeaux]

This may be kind of a stupid question but when comparing this case to the OJ Simpson case which do you think has more evidence of guilt? I was pretty young during the OJ case so I don't really remember what the circumstantial and forensic evidence was. Do you think if Casey got off it would be as big of a shock (if not bigger) than OJ?

Personally, I think there was more evidence in the OJ case. There was a shoe print (he said he didn't own any shoes like that but after the trial, a photo surfaced of him wearing the shoes) there was the glove, there was blood on his car door, he had a wound on his hand. I think if Mark Furhman would have been truthful about using derogatory terms in the past, OJ would have been convicted. But MF lied and the jury obviously believed if he would lie about one thing, he'd lie about another. Like chain of evidence.

ME TOO, I think there is a possibility that one juror would come up with reasonable doubt, that is why I hope they can TIE casey to Caylees demise. I am not so sure that having everthing pointing at Casey is enough.
It does all point at Casey, and I hope they will find that one link that will tie her to it.
There is an article right above this one that seems to agree with my thinking that it is no slam dunk.
IMO the strength of the case against her are:
31 days not reported,
She goes out to party,
Car smells like a dead person,
Tape on baby with a Sticker on the tape.
THAT is a lot.

That is alot. But I wish they had more. I wish they could determine a cause of death, I wish they had a fingerprint or SOMETHING concrete. I wish the fbi and body farm reports had not contained phrases which left room for doubt.

I wish it was a slam dunk, but I don't think it is.

 

[PaulaF513]

Nope, I do not think they normally would be able to get a conviction with the evidence we think they have.

However, because of the unprecedented release of recordings and interviews, notes, etc. that may have been kept out of a trial - and the ability of potential jurors to read/hear them, they probably will get a conviction. LE, IMHO, have circumvented the judicial system in this case.

I totally agree with you. If ever there was a case that was tried in the media, this is it. It would certainly seem, according to the mountain of evidence released, that KC is guilty beyond any, let alone reasonable, doubt. . Her demeanor, her attitude, her affect, all have contributed to the contempt with which she is viewed by the public. In this most unusual case, she has no one but herself to blame for that.

But I think that the SS laws in Florida have made LE's job easier, in that a plethora of investigatory material has been publicized and many people have formed opinions based upon that. Whether all this "stuff" actually makes it into a trial remains to be seen, but the harm has been done. Kinda like a judge telling a jury to ignore the witness' confession, once something is seen or heard, it's in the mind.

As far as the real forensic evidence, I am truly hoping they find her fingerprints on the duct tape. As far as I can see, there is lots of evidence linking the crime scene with the Hopespring house. However, I've said before, I think the single hair with the alleged "death band" and analysis of an odor that was over a month old, are not foolproof science. I do believe they can and will be vigorously challenged.

I have the sickening feeling no matter the outcome of her trial, KC intends to keep quiet about the truth. No witness to the crime, no confession, no one will ever know for sure what happened to little Caylee. And no one will ever know why it happened. I feel very sorry for the Anthonys, to have to live with that vagueness the rest of their lives. Then again, perhaps it's a mercy that she doesn't tell.

 

[songline]

That is alot. But I wish they had more. I wish they could determine a cause of death, I wish they had a fingerprint or SOMETHING concrete. I wish the fbi and body farm reports had not contained phrases which left room for doubt.

I wish it was a slam dunk, but I don't think it is.

IMO it is far from a slam dunk;and suspicion is not convictable.
I just cant believe that she is that smart to have gotten into this mess without having one witness to any of it.
There MUST be one other person that knows something for sure.
She is just not that smart.

 

[songline]

Do you think LE has enough evidence to get Casey on 1st Degree Murder?

Yes I think LE has enough evidence for 1st Degree Murder. They have a plethora of circumstantial evidence, which KC can't refute because she won't testify. She is a known liar and jurors tend to not believe liars.

Sue

I think that when they have enough they do set a court date.
A court date seems far away.

 

[trixi491]

I think this trial will go down exactly like Scott Peterson's. There are so many similiarities--the high amount of circumstantial evidence (mostly on the behavior) vs direct evidence, the intense media coverage that called for a change of venue, and the fact that the victims included their own children. Despite the fact that there is no confession, eye witnesses, or direct cause of death, I think the jury will be able to look past all that, like they did with SP, and find her guilty.

 

[miabellamoure]

I hope so, but I am not convinced. What do you guys think?

I voted yes :yes:

1st Degree in a heart beat...DP, not sure.

 

[JBean]

bumpity bump

 

[Nore]

I voted yes :yes:

1st Degree in a heart beat...DP, not sure.

-------------------------
I believe they do have enough and then some.I believe (as many others) they have much we dont know about..:clap: