The Verdict - Do you agree or disagree?

[RR0004]

On 7/16, the only story they knew was of a kidnapping. Although they may not have believed it, that is all that they knew for the time. How does that constitute child neglect?

31 days...31 days of not telling anyone her child was "missing"...31 days!

 

[kelian36]

I feel exactly the same way as you. Not only was the verdict innane, the manner in which this so called jury reached that verdict was ridiculous and NOT in accordance to the law or the Court's instructions. MOO

<snippet> Case law says that, under unusual circumstances, a judge can withhold jurors' names for about a week. Their names could be released early next week. But the judge didn't say when the clock started on that period.

http://www.tampabay.com/news/courts...s-will-be-released-8212-but-not-today/1179295

bbm/ EXACTLY how I feel. :seeya:

 

[RR0004]

I cry for Caylee.

 

[kelian36]

On 7/16, the only story they knew was of a kidnapping. Although they may not have believed it, that is all that they knew for the time. How does that constitute child neglect?

Several LE officers spoke about this both before and after the trial. When a child is missing for 31 days--knowingly missing--and the mother doesn't report it.........it's child neglect.
*** After reading the entire thread, I see all you wise people pointed this out.
Which brings me to............
Why the same questions week after week after week after week?

 

[kelian36]

Didn't answer the question--
NO, I do not agree with the verdict.
Who was it here that said?

One village
Twelve ******

 

[LCoastMom]

How many times did LDB ask the jury that very question? I don't think it ever registered in their minds.

I don't think anything they heard after the drowning did! A lie by all accounts and IMO they let a murderer go free. Disgraceful!

 

[MeenaMom]

I completely disagree with the verdict I believe the jury was exhausted and really over this trial and anxious to get on with their lives and the did not look at the evidence clearly. I believe the two that were set on guilty were bullied into voting not guilty...And bear with me while I tell you why..It may seem a bit out there for some but its my observation.

While some here may not believe KC is attractive men around here do.. A Melbourne beach man even hit a girl and threw himself in the Ocean to stand up for his desire for KC. My own husband doesn't believe she is all that guilty because she is so pretty and that goes for all the men I have discussed this case with face to face. They believe pretty girls can't premeditate to kill their baby. :banghead:
I believe the foreman was such a man as the ones I have discussed this case with, and He had a really strong personality and was able to persuade the others to his side of the table because they were exhausted and wanted to go home. I don't think the jurors foresaw the backlash coming their way for NOT taking the time to deliberate more.
I strongly feel we will eventually see the jurors that felt she was guilty sooner or later and they will open up to the truth behind the deliberations.
My humble opinion and Thank you for letting me voice it.

 

[MissJames]

I completely disagree with the verdict I believe the jury was exhausted and really over this trial and anxious to get on with their lives and the did not look at the evidence clearly. I believe the two that were set on guilty were bullied into voting not guilty...And bear with me while I tell you why..It may seem a bit out there for some but its my observation.

While some here may not believe KC is attractive men around here do.. A Melbourne beach man even hit a girl and threw himself in the Ocean to stand up for his desire for KC. My own husband doesn't believe she is all that guilty because she is so pretty and that goes for all the men I have discussed this case with face to face. They believe pretty girls can't premeditate to kill their baby. :banghead:
I believe the foreman was such a man as the ones I have discussed this case with, and He had a really strong personality and was able to persuade the others to his side of the table because they were exhausted and wanted to go home. I don't think the jurors foresaw the backlash coming their way for NOT taking the time to deliberate more.
I strongly feel we will eventually see the jurors that felt she was guilty sooner or later and they will open up to the truth behind the deliberations.
My humble opinion and Thank you for letting me voice it.

I'm sure you're right about the guys ,but if I may make a correction about the jurors; 2 jurors thought the crime rose to the level of Felony 1,but 6 jurors voted guilty of manslaughter. I hope and pray some of them come forward with juror #2 and explain what happened. i believe they were coerced with faulty information.

 

[Little Black Dress]

reminds me how oj team was shocked at his verdict, including oj...kinda eerie similar path here...imo

Yes...........all except one. If you get a chance, find the old footage (perhaps YouTube?) and check out the reaction on the face of Robert Kardashian (friend and lawyer to OJ) when that verdict was read. The utter and complete shock on his face bordered on sheer horror and disbelief. It's quite clear to see that not only did he expect to see OJ convicted, but seems to have even preferred that possibility (no poker face on him, that's for sure! ).

And to tie this back to topic, the look on Kardashian's face reminded me somewhat of the look on George Anthony's face when the verdict was read in Ms. Anthony's case. He too, was shocked, but not necessarily 'happy'.

Odd coincidence? Nah...just two people who not only expected the respective defendents to be convicted, but also appeared to believe them to be guilty.

Just my opinion.

 

[LCoastMom]

I do know this conversation between the 2 took place from early afternoon (around 3ish IIRC) until evening hours, so if it was a weekday, CA would've most likely been at work. I assumed that Casey was trying to get CA to watch Caylee with no luck, but for some reason she told TR that it was her nanny that was out of commission. If she didn't really like him like that, why just keep him hanging on for hours, and when he said that waiting for 3 weeks to see her isn't a good "relationship", why not just drop him then? I think she was into him, but she was also into other men as well.

Because it's what she does! She started messing with TR while still with Jesse, TL while still with RM and don't forget was keeping MH on the lead at the time too and slept with the young guy who lived with his parents during the TL timeline! IMO she must have a back up to her back up, it's all a game that went right over this jury's head!

If this was an accident that both GA and Casey knew about and were fully involved in covering it up, I have to disagree that Casey didn't cover for GA. Perhaps she got tired of covering for him after his Grand Jury testimony, figured he was throwing her under the bus so the gig was up, she wasn't going to deal with it anymore. (speculation of course, but is possible)

Please, I respect that this is your opinion but where is the evidence that GA was a participant in this crime? Anything that says GA was involved? I've seen none in the three years I've followed this case!!

Hung jury under the assumption that you could find 12 people who would completely disagree. I understand I'm a minority on this board, so if they were going to take 12 members from this board alone, chances are it would be guilty on all charges, IMO. But, then again, there was access to all discovery documents, and access to deliberate way before the trial... so hard to say what the outcome would've been.

REDBBM

I'm speaking theoretically about the Pinellas 12. If I were among the 12 people on that jury their stay would have been extended. No way would they have convinced me to acquit. Cruises and vacations be damned. They agreed to take the "job" and they knew about how long to expect to be away. I don't give a fig about their lives away from the trial! They failed Caylee Marie and now they must live with themselves. Doesn't surprise me a bit they are not showing their faces!

 

[Little Black Dress]

I'll never forget the look on Kardashian's face when they announced the verdict, he was stunned.

Ha! I just posted virtually the same thing.....sorry, didn't see your post until just now!

 

[Baznme]

Several LE officers spoke about this both before and after the trial. When a child is missing for 31 days--knowingly missing--and the mother doesn't report it.........it's child neglect.
*** After reading the entire thread, I see all you wise people pointed this out.
Which brings me to............
Why the same questions week after week after week after week?

Thus we now have Caylee's Law in how many States? Should be self-explanatory but, to some, maybe not?

 

[Thinker Belle]

Nope still don't agree with the verdict and probably never will. IMO This verdict defies logic and COMMON SENSE. Had I been on that jury the vote would have been 11-1 until I turned blue in the face from defending it

 

[MissJames]

Responses bolded in blue...

Hung jury under the assumption that you could find 12 people who would completely disagree. I understand I'm a minority on this board, so if they were going to take 12 members from this board alone, chances are it would be guilty on all charges, IMO. But, then again, there was access to all discovery documents, and access to deliberate way before the trial... so hard to say what the outcome would've been.

I don't know how to quote a response that is placed within another poster's quote,but in reference to FICA covering for GA ,while sitting in jail for almost 3 years, over an accidental drowning :waitasec:I really don't think so.

FICA waived her right to a speedy trial.The DT dragged their feet the entire 3 years. They spent a LOT of time and money investigating TES volunteers (which is where I believe the witness tampering investigation is focused). When the TES documents were offered up to them they took MONTHS to get around to finally looking at them.
Just no way FICA would have sat in solitary all that time covering up for GA over an accidental drowning.
The defense was stuck on proving SODDI until all there motions were shot down.I don't think they believed their unethical OS would work,but they knew there was too much evidence against SODDI.
Going back through the motions thread is eyeopening.
JMO>

 

[MarthaM]

I think the jury's verdict was correct. The prosecution proved only two things to me: Casey lied on a regular basis, and her family has a lot of problems.

 

[LCoastMom]

But....but...but..LyndyLoo - the jury didn't know who Caylee's caretaker was! :banghead:

Yeah, IMO there are a lot of things they don't know! I'll leave it at that, I like it here... :innocent:

 

[Thinker Belle]

If any case screams for jury reform, it's this one.. Maybe in future cases, clearer direction should be provided by a judge, instead of simply relying on a list of court documented instructions.
Courts also should make it crystal clear that circumstantial evidence is still evidence and reasonable doubt must be just that - reasonable. A trial is supposed to be a search for the truth and needless to say, this case left everyone with more questions than answers.
I also think attorneys on either side should not be allowed to just get up and say whatever they want if they have no intention to prove it (see Baez OS) and there should be sanctions harsh enough to deter them from doing so. Even though HJBP would not allow JB to discuss the molestation accusation in CS, the jury nevertheless heard this in opening statements. That IMO could have clouded their perspective.

JMO

 

[MissJames]

Bumping from the other thread BBM

Thread: If you agree or disagree with the verdict, let us know why
View Single Post
#1279 Report Post
Unread 07-23-2011, 09:57 PM
JBean's Avatar
JBean JBean is offline
WS Adminoderator

Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Dana Point,CA
Posts: 13,387
PSA:
When you guys want to respond to individual passages within one persons quote, it is best to quote each section,repsond, quote the next section,respond and so on. The reason is after awhile, it is very hard to determine who said what to whom.

One way to do this is to highlight the section you are quoting and then click the quote tab at the top of the posting box:


It will wrap whatever you have highlighted in a darkened quote box and then you can respond.

I try to fix them when I see them, but I often times cannot tell who said what and I don't want to confuse the issue or misquote someone.

hope that helps
__________________

 

[Thinker Belle]

FCA is one of the luckiest people alive. Watching this video on the Scott Peterson case:
http://youtu.be/16yDfsKS5g4

If you fast forward to 7:20 in the video you will hear 3 people on the SP jury give reasons why they came to their verdict. The similarities between this case and FCA's are eery."The case was circumstantial and everything put together makes the whole picture." WHY couldn't FCA jurors do that??? :banghead:

100% disagree with the verdict, the jury got it dead wrong IMO

 

[Caligram]

The jury had been forced to remain idle, mentally, during all those many sidebars. Then there were other delays after the trial finally started, including JB leaving after lunch one day and FCA suffering from &#8220;trauma&#8221; and cutting the day short. Another day lost for taking a deposition from a defense witness, as I recall. I wonder how much of each trial day in that courtroom, for the jury, was shortened by sidebars, breaks and lunches, in addition to early dismissals. This jury was sequestered, it wouldn't take a college degree to understand that delays were making the captives restless. The DT knew there were time commitments by a few jurors, so delay, delay, and delay. The DT got away many shoddy actions by threatening to demand a mistrial. This perception of time of this selection for this jury and by this jury was way off, and a fatal flaw.
Once it finally came time for the jury to de-liberate, they liberated FCA. The party was over, they were anxious to do a &#8220;quick pick&#8221; that would not require listening to arguments during a penalty phase. This jury decided they weren&#8217;t going to be punished with that decision, and be stuck with all that extra work. The jury selection should have also included the statement that unforeseen delays were possible and needed to be considered. Anyone with prior travel arrangements for cruises etc. in the next ten weeks should not have been allowed to be part of the jury.
This case is going to become a favorite of defense attorneys who are unknown (like JB was before he got lucky). How to get away like murder &#8211; just lie like hell in your opening statement. You don't have to prove it. Just plant the dirt in the minds of the jurors. As you sow, so shall you reap? Plant dirt and get a dirty outcome. They did!!