The Verdict - Do you agree or disagree? #3

[suzihawk]

there is some great information a little further up in the thread about the evidence that was in the jury room. it wasn't all of the evidence.

Thank you. I read that. But I'm looking for confirmation that ALL of the evidence was in the jury room as the OP stated - since he/she is such a stickler for every little detail.

 

[suzihawk]

I gotta say I am impressed with the jurors ability to speed read then, and review evidence - more than 350 pieces in five hours - that would be 70 pieces an hour - they need to package that technique and sell it.

Not to mention that they didn't have one single question, including about the jury instructions they so clearly did not understand.

 

[tsitra01]

What do yo think C-felon talks about now after her whole life story has been exposed as lies? I would imagine the only therapy she is going thru is to think up another life story to impress her future contacts. I feel sorry for anyone who crosses her path.

 

[natsound]

I've argued to long too. Bottom line for me- a woman culpable in the death of her child, who threw her own baby away in a swamp after covering her mouth in duct tape and lying about what happened is FREE in America today. FREE, free, free. That's what our system got us. Laws need to be changed. Jury service needs to be paid well enough to defray the hardship of serving but needs to be more or less mandatory if we are to continue believing the jury of our peer canard. The excusing of anyone who knows much about anything needs to stop. Selection should be more of a lottery. Changes of venue should not happen more than once in a lifetime. Sequestration should never happen. We either trust civilians as jurors from the community in which they live to go home at night and to not have been or not be unduly influenced by media and other surroundings, or we don't. If we don't, then it's time to start talking about something else. I'm still hoping that a non professional jury system can be salvaged, but if not, let's move on.

I agree with what I bolded above. During jury selection, I said they should just grab people off the street for the jury. This whole vetting a jury is wrong, IMO.

 

[Chablis]

Had FCA told the truth from the beginning, this story could have been way different. If you think that this whole trial came down to the search for an "obscure" drug and air samples and you are ignoring all of the other evidence ... well ... I can't say here what I really want to say.

Lets say no chloroform was found in the admitted cleaned and aired out trunk, then what what the State used as motive? An FBI guy said the levels were normal, the State went to some unexplored new science and tried to use that as proof. They didn't have her buying the stuff, they had nothing but speculation, and fortunately in this country, thats not enough to kill someone. I wish Casey had done the right thing and avoided all this, but she didn't. jmo

 

[MissJames]

I've never used the term "forced" when discussing the jurors. I do think the foreman and JF used faulty reasoning,which may not have been intentional,but was never the less,wrong. I believe ,based on the foreman's own words,that he influenced the for guilt jurors to change their votes ,based on his own faulty reasoning. Rather than doing the right thing and wading back through the jury instructions,they used their own terms to come to a consensus.
I do believe that the NG jurors simply wore down the others by using inaccurate rules,but that's just my opinion. Until more of the jury speaks out,I can only go by the interviews the 3 or 4 have done. I think the truth will come out one day. I hope HHJP is looking into it.He has every reason to consider there may have been jury misconduct ,such as talking about the case before the deliberations started. I'm not saying it happened,but it should be investigated.

I believe there should have been 12 guilty votes for Felony 1, a hung jury at the very least. I will never be able to wrap my head around all 12 logically coming to the conclusion they had to vote NG.
Maybe the juror who was allegedly requesting $50,000 for an interview can explain it to us .

 

[suzihawk]

Lets say no chloroform was found in the admitted cleaned and aired out trunk, then what what the State used as motive? An FBI guy said the levels were normal, the State went to some unexplored new science and tried to use that as proof. They didn't have her buying the stuff, they had nothing but speculation, and fortunately in this country, thats not enough to kill someone. I wish Casey had done the right thing and avoided all this, but she didn't. jmo

That wasn't the jury's only option. And they weren't in the penalty phase of the trial so that shouldn't have been a consideration at that point.

Sigh...

 

[MissJames]

And from those jurors who did come forward it sounded more as if there was more of an argument centered around the death penalty more so than a discussion about the actual evidence which was not supposed to be discussed during deliberations. It's as if they skipped the whole deliberation process and went right to the penalty stage. No wonder they were confused. jmo

Also based on believing GA was lying,due to the OS and Krystal Holloway's (alias River Cruz) testimony ,which was impeached by the State with her sworn statement to LE.
Go figure :banghead:

 

[Baznme]

So in your belief any child that accidentally dies is CULPABLE negligence and therefore is guilty of Aggravated Manslaughter? So any parent that let's their child out of their sight and the child drowns, chokes, runs out in the street and gets hit, etc. is punishable by builty of aggravated manslaughter. I'm not agreeing with that but you are entitled to your opinion.

It's all in your interpretation of the definition, I guess. I have a friend of the family that drove drunk one night with 2 friends in the car. They hit a telephone pole and one of the passengers was killed. The driver, (who was over the allowed level for alcohol in his system) was given 6 years in jail for aggravated manslaughter. It was an accident but due to negligence.

If you have a pool and a 2.5 yr. old. You're on the computer or you've fallen asleep and you didn't check to make sure the doors were locked and the child was inside with you before you went on with whatever you wanted to do, then yes, you are negligent because you didn't take all precautions to ensure the safety of your child.

It would be the same if they were in the backyard already and she got on the phone, not paying attention to what the baby was doing and Caylee climbed that ladder and she drowned. YOU can be held responsible because you did not ensure the safety of your child.

She could have been held legally responsible. Lots of families that have lost children this way were not prosecuted and the drowning deemed "accidental". If this is "culpable negligence" and if Florida courts were to exercise the law as it is written, there would be a lot more people to face the charges. Many don't get to the courts and are written up in police reports as an "accident".

That being said, I don't believe that's what happened here. Too many of FCA's activities in March that indicate to me this was planned, far in advance and so the point of the alleged "accidental" drowning is moot IMHO.

 

[LambChop]

Lets say no chloroform was found in the admitted cleaned and aired out trunk, then what what the State used as motive? An FBI guy said the levels were normal, the State went to some unexplored new science and tried to use that as proof. They didn't have her buying the stuff, they had nothing but speculation, and fortunately in this country, thats not enough to kill someone. I wish Casey had done the right thing and avoided all this, but she didn't. jmo

I think the difference was that there were two totally different pieces of carpet and packaged differently. One packaged in a bag for the FBI which allowed off gasing and the other in a metal container which did not allow off gasing. Chloroform gases dissipate very quickly. The fact that Dr. Vass found such high levels in his sample only proves that there were even higher levels at the time the chloroform was there, such as 100% pure chloroform on that sample so it may have been from spillage. Had the FBI gotten Dr. Vass' sample their findings may have been much higher. Also wasn't the testing done differently. One test was solely done on the carpet itself and the other was done on the gases emitted from the carpet sample.

This jury would have never given her death. But they did need to find a charge for the reponsibility in the death of her child. KC lied about the death of her daughter. The only reason to ever lie is to hide the truth. Something this jury considered with little, if any weight. jmo

 

[cityslick]

I spoke to a few people who never really followed the case, just got their info from what they read and talked about among others and almost every single one of them came away with the opinion that they think she had something to do with the death of her daughter but the prosecution failed big time in proving it.

Now, I'm not sure where those opinions are coming from (media?) but all of them (like 6-7 people) agreed the prosecution did not fully prove that she did it.

I thought it was interesting on what public perception may be.

 

[SailorMoon]

Disagree - the Pinellas County 12 should hang their heads in shame for a long time -- they let a murderer walk free and were too worried about who would talk to the media instead of looking at the evidence. Linda Drane Burdick and Jeff Ashton had to have felt punked when they heard the verdict. I did - I mean are you kidding me???

 

[margE]

I'm the poster that asked for proof. And yet to have seen any that Cheney stated "she is obviously guilty" and have only seen personal interpretation as to what he actually did say means.

I guess you didn't read enough. My post was not for you..

 

[MissJames]

I agree with what I bolded above. During jury selection, I said they should just grab people off the street for the jury. This whole vetting a jury is wrong, IMO.

I believe it was LoneTraveler who suggested that the jurors had to go through training and take a test ,before they could serve. I like that idea. Even before they are assigned to a certain case,they should go through training and take a test.
Geez,the law is much more complicated than it was 200+ years ago .Science has changed evidence that comes in.

I'd like to see training and testing implemented
fewer hardship excuses.Let's go back to serving on a jury as a civic duty and have some pride in the system.
NO compensation for jurors ,with the exception of the stipend from the courts.No Disney World ,no book deals,no paid licensing fees ,etc.

This was a big wake up call to our country . Well over one million citizens signed Caylee's Law in response to the NG verdict in the first 5 days . It's up to 1,287,000 + now. I haven't seen another petition about anything come close to those numbers.

JMO

 

[Chablis]

I think the difference was that there were two totally different pieces of carpet and packaged differently. One packaged in a bag for the FBI which allowed off gasing and the other in a metal container which did not allow off gasing. Chloroform gases dissipate very quickly. The fact that Dr. Vass found such high levels in his sample only proves that there were even higher levels at the time the chloroform was there, such as 100% pure chloroform on that sample so it may have been from spillage. Had the FBI gotten Dr. Vass' sample their findings may have been much higher. Also wasn't the testing done differently. One test was solely done on the carpet itself and the other was done on the gases emitted from the carpet sample.

This jury would have never given her death. But they did need to find a charge for the reponsibility in the death of her child. KC lied about the death of her daughter. The only reason to ever lie is to hide the truth. Something this jury considered with little, if any weight. jmo

I guess I just am in the mindset and its easier for me to believe the FBI. Casey is lazy and there were so many more ways to kill her child or make her sleep then making chloroform. I think the jury does think Casey is responsible but the State had to prove it, and they didn't, one search and aired out samples was not proof at all. One day of partying was not enough motive. I too was left with the States closing thinking, thats it? Live and learn I guess. jmo

 

[LambChop]

It's all in your interpretation of the definition, I guess. I have a friend of the family that drove drunk one night with 2 friends in the car. They hit a telephone pole and one of the passengers was killed. The driver, (who was over the allowed level for alcohol in his system) was given 6 years in jail for aggravated manslaughter. It was an accident but due to negligence.

If you have a pool and a 2.5 yr. old. You're on the computer or you've fallen asleep and you didn't check to make sure the doors were locked and the child was inside with you before you went on with whatever you wanted to do, then yes, you are negligent because you didn't take all precautions to ensure the safety of your child.

It would be the same if they were in the backyard already and she got on the phone, not paying attention to what the baby was doing and Caylee climbed that ladder and she drowned. YOU can be held responsible because you did not ensure the safety of your child.

She could have been held legally responsible. Lots of families that have lost children this way were not prosecuted and the drowning deemed "accidental". If this is "culpable negligence" and if Florida courts were to exercise the law as it is written, there would be a lot more people to face the charges. Many don't get to the courts and are written up in police reports as an "accident".

That being said, I don't believe that's what happened here. Too many of FCA's activities in March that indicate to me this was planned, far in advance and so the point of the alleged "accidental" drowning is moot IMHO.

I don't think LE, for the most part, are inclined to charge families when a child drowns. They feel the family has suffered enough. Unless they walk into a home and find the custodian drunk or high on drugs I doubt you would see any charges brought against them.

I do think that if you have the money to buy a pool you should also have the money to equip your pool with an alarm. They are fairly cheap. Something that did bother me, too, was the lack of an alarm on the A's slider. In CA if you have a pool you have to put alarms on your doors that lead to the pool area. My mother had to have them and my parents were in their 80's no children, grandchildren living within the State and they still were required to have them by law. jmo

 

[Aedrys]

I think the difference was that there were two totally different pieces of carpet and packaged differently. One packaged in a bag for the FBI which allowed off gasing and the other in a metal container which did not allow off gasing. Chloroform gases dissipate very quickly. The fact that Dr. Vass found such high levels in his sample only proves that there were even higher levels at the time the chloroform was there, such as 100% pure chloroform on that sample so it may have been from spillage. Had the FBI gotten Dr. Vass' sample their findings may have been much higher. Also wasn't the testing done differently. One test was solely done on the carpet itself and the other was done on the gases emitted from the carpet sample.

This jury would have never given her death. But they did need to find a charge for the reponsibility in the death of her child. KC lied about the death of her daughter. The only reason to ever lie is to hide the truth. Something this jury considered with little, if any weight. jmo

I agree with you, except the SA got the FBI guy to clarify, and had to almost pull teeth to get it out of him, the fact that he found any chloroform in the carpet sample at all indicated that there must have been massive quantities of chloroform in that trunk. He was surprised to find any at all because chloroform is volatile and evaporates quickly. So yes, the FBI found what he classified as normal levels, BUT even those normal levels shouldn't have been there since chloroform evaporates. That made his test and Vass's match up. Vass found exceeding levels, and in effect, the FBI guy found it too because NONE was supposed to be found at all. But you're right, one tested carpet and one tested air. Since chloroform evaporates, then logically, more would be found in the air than in the carpet sample. BTW, I can't remember the exact words of the FBI guy, but I summarized what he said. I remember because I felt so disappointed at first because it didn't match Vass, and then when the SA made him clarify it, I had an AHA moment. It made sense.

 

[Sustained]

Lets say no chloroform was found in the admitted cleaned and aired out trunk, then what what the State used as motive? An FBI guy said the levels were normal, the State went to some unexplored new science and tried to use that as proof. They didn't have her buying the stuff, they had nothing but speculation, and fortunately in this country, thats not enough to kill someone. I wish Casey had done the right thing and avoided all this, but she didn't. jmo

The State does not have to prove motive or "why" she killed her kid, just that she did. You, like many others, are looking for the smoking gun. There are so many ways FCA could have gotten the ingredients to make chloroform and FCA is the one who did the "how to make chloroform" search on the net. We can argue the presence of chloroform in the trunk until we're both blue in the face. That is not the only piece of evidence that should have convicted FCA. Everyone is ignoring the consciousness of guilt evidence, INCLUDING the jury. Read up on consciousness of guilt and tell me that if should not have been included in the jury's decision in this case.

And as common sense tells me, no one in the case of an accident fails to call 911 and dumps their kid in a swamp in garbage bags. I repeat ... NO ONE, especially a loving mom as FCA was testified to be.

The jury that convicted Scott Petersen never had a smoking gun, either but was able to connect the dots and rightfully put him away for good.

And one more thing ... DNA was once a new science and lookie now ... it's used in almost every murder trial. I personally believe in the air sample science ... air is made up of chemical compunds and new compounds can be introduced into the air. Dr. Vass has 15 years of experience in decomposing bodies and the chemicals released into the air from decomposition. Who from the defense can make this claim ?

 

[pcrum12]

Ah..hmm...AZ is not a criminal lawyer..... and does not practise in Florida and the evidence was still all laid out on the evidence table......when the verdict was read.

1st BBM: not sure what you're referring to here -- I don't think I referenced anything pertaining to fellow member AZ.

2nd BBM: Please reference this video of the verdict being read. at 6:34 or there about. It clearly shows no exhibits on the table in the courtroom.
http://abclocal.go.com/wabc/video?id=8232571

Furthermore, several news sources do state that over 400 exhibits were received in the jury room.

http://www.wjla.com/articles/2011/07...day-63160.html

"The jury received the more than 400 pieces of evidence in the jury room that have been by both sides in the case since the trial began in late May.

But jurors will be brought into open court should they request to view any of the video evidence, a court official said. Equipment for video viewing is not available in the deliberation room. The jury has the ability to send questions to Judge Perry via the court deputies, but had yet to do so."


And there are more sources:
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-...-resume-in-Fla
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=13997260
http://www.wsvn.com/news/articles/local/21004755633971/

 

[MissJames]

I spoke to a few people who never really followed the case, just got their info from what they read and talked about among others and almost every single one of them came away with the opinion that they think she had something to do with the death of her daughter but the prosecution failed big time in proving it.

Now, I'm not sure where those opinions are coming from (media?) but all of them (like 6-7 people) agreed the prosecution did not fully prove that she did it.

I thought it was interesting on what public perception may be.

BBM

I'm repeating ,but looking at public perception ,ONE MILLION ,TWO HUNDRED AND EIGHTY SEVEN THOUSAND,ONE HUNDRED + people have signed CAYLEE'S LAW because the jurors needed it spelled out for them.

Have you asked the 6-7 if they watched the entire trial?