U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > True Crime
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 07-20-2011, 05:50 PM
 
9,917 posts, read 9,321,799 times
Reputation: 8058

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taratova View Post
Ok, Baez did a brilliant "con" job manipulating with what the bar was on a conviction. He had three years to practice lying manipulating and deceiving these jurors.. Raised to standards the jury themselves got caught up to convict ,by Baez's standards they needed more.. Baez told them so.. they needed a video of Casey killing Caylee to know the where and when..to know how she died.. ,,. so sad too.. the why and how was ignored..
He did an excellent job throwing anything he could on the wall. He was gracious, smiling and personal with the jury. Good morning/good afternoon ladies and gentlemen of the jury. He is sleaze and was a typical 'ambulance chaser' before he lucked up with Casey Anthony.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taratova View Post
the jurors even went on tv to clear up what they thought was a good reason for their verdict.. made them look like a puppet of what Baez told them and it was total infantile babble as far as clear reasoning goes... Listen to Baez closing arguments on youtube. Baez told them how to think and what to think to come to a verdict. Superficial shallow rambling ran amuck as these jurors spoke on the verdict. It was eye opening .
Jennifer Ford, juror #3 is a total airhead. On her ABC news interview, she stresses that “not guilty doesn’t mean innocent.” Had she ruled that Anthony was guilty of murder when she wasn’t, she would have committed a crime for sending an innocent woman to death, Ford underlines.

That is the most ridiculous statement one could make.

There was manslaughter and other charges that could have been considered that DID NOT carry the death penalty. So the Pinellas 12 go down the list ... like a menu ... hmmmm let's do the 4 charges of lying to law enforcement.

 
Old 07-20-2011, 05:51 PM
 
Location: Nassau, Long Island, NY
16,408 posts, read 28,946,818 times
Reputation: 7273
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosco55David View Post
Really? You know that? Well why weren't you offering your services to the prosecution? I'm sure they would have LOVED to be able to discredit that.
No proof was given that it happened, was it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosco55David View Post
No, I said that it was introduced to create reasonable doubt, but that is all you got right.
If they introduced it "to create reasonable doubt," then why am I incorrect in the rest of the statement?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosco55David View Post
Where did I say that?
You said: "Since Casey had first hand knowledge of the drowning, there is no "theory" (nor was it presented that way) and hence no speculation."

It sounds like you believe the drowning was true with the above statement. Casey had firsthand knowledge of the drowning, drowning is NOT a theory, drowning is NOT speculation ... If not, what do you actually believe?
 
Old 07-20-2011, 06:01 PM
 
Location: Tampa (by way of Omaha)
13,945 posts, read 19,196,130 times
Reputation: 9175
Quote:
Originally Posted by I_Love_LI_but View Post
No proof was given that it happened, was it?
And once again, the prosecution, NOT the defense, must prove it's case. This is Criminal Justice 101 here.

Quote:
If they introduced it "to create reasonable doubt," then why am I incorrect in the rest of the statement?
Because first off, you're wrong. It was never introduced as a story or "what if" scenario. Second, introducing something to create doubt does not automatically equal speculation.

Quote:
You said: "Since Casey had first hand knowledge of the drowning, there is no "theory" (nor was it presented that way) and hence no speculation."

It sounds like you believe the drowning was true with the above statement. Casey had firsthand knowledge of the drowning, drowning is NOT a theory, drowning is NOT speculation ... If not, what do you actually believe?
Whether I believe the statement is true is completely irrelevant to it not being speculation.
 
Old 07-20-2011, 06:16 PM
 
Location: Tampa (by way of Omaha)
13,945 posts, read 19,196,130 times
Reputation: 9175
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarolinaWoman View Post
Jennifer Ford, juror #3 is a total airhead. On her ABC news interview, she stresses that “not guilty doesn’t mean innocent.” Had she ruled that Anthony was guilty of murder when she wasn’t, she would have committed a crime for sending an innocent woman to death, Ford underlines.

That is the most ridiculous statement one could make.
Ok, let's stop the misinformation campaign. She did NOT say she would have "committed a crime." She said she would be "a murderer too, and I'm not any better".
 
Old 07-20-2011, 06:26 PM
 
9,550 posts, read 4,889,058 times
Reputation: 3888
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosco55David View Post
[snip]
Whether I believe the statement is true is completely irrelevant to it not being speculation.
Several of us must have a different definition of the word 'speculation' than you do.

Do you consider the accidental drowning Not speculation because Baez said that it happened ?

Rules of Deliberation #2 states --- "This case must be decided only upon the evidence that you have heard from the testimony of the witnesses and have seen in the form of the exhibits in evidence and these instructions."

I can't check now, but the judge also might have told jurors the opening statements aren't evidence.

Opening statements and closing arguments aren't evidence. IIRC, the only supposed evidence of a drowning were that Caylee could open a glass door leading to the pool area, the ladder was up, and Caylee was able to climb the ladder. I mean, really, do you consider that 'evidence' that a drowning happened ?
 
Old 07-20-2011, 06:30 PM
 
28,206 posts, read 20,799,235 times
Reputation: 16599
News - Casey Anthony Spotting Was a Hoax - InsideEdition.com

Nancy Grace is such an ignorant ass. WTF is she even talking about?!

I kind of LOLed about the hoax. Stupid media get what they deserve.
 
Old 07-20-2011, 06:44 PM
 
Location: US
3,092 posts, read 3,457,690 times
Reputation: 1639
Not one expert was able to say how Caylee died. There was nothing concrete for the jury to hang their hats on. Baez was not brilliant. He was smart enough to know his limitations. It was the prosecution's case to lose, and lose they did because it was a dry bones case which did not provide enough evidence. They put everything on they had, and did a great job doing so. Had Caylee's body been found earlier, it may have been a completely different trial and result. Casey's team won because (1) Cheney Mason and Ann Finnell are seasoned trial attorneys, (2) Amy Singer, the trial consultant, used social media to test the effectiveness of the witnesses, which was really the most brilliant strategy of the whole trial, (3) Caylee had been in the woods/water so long that there was no DNA left and (4) the science used by the prosecution was too new for the jury to find Casey guilty. I do believe it will be used and more accepted in the future, though--we'll see.

You asked another poster to point to the jury instruction given by the Court that opening statements are not evidence. It's the preliminary instruction given to the jury. Do a Google search for preliminary instructions in criminal cases. That should pull it out for you.

In a dry bones case, just about everything is up for interpretation, and the person who stuffed Caylee into that bag and put her in the woods/water is still moving around "free."

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bosco55David View Post
No, and she doesn't have to.
George denied it, although his behavior on the stand was very questionable, even according to the jury.
Point me to the part of the jury instructions that state this. You and me both know the cause of death was impossible to determine, a major roadblock to getting a conviction.

LOL! Photos are speculation? No, not quite. They can be taken out of context though. Oh, and I also believe that Cindy testified that Caylee could in fact climb the ladder.



It was never speculation to begin with.
 
Old 07-20-2011, 06:51 PM
 
Location: US
3,092 posts, read 3,457,690 times
Reputation: 1639
I disagree with this. The hoax, if it was one, is not one to laugh about. A little girl is dead and her mom's attorneys are making a mockery of it. The Anthony's got the media involved to help find their granddaughter. It was Casey's own mysterious actions that brought this frenzy on. You can't have it both ways with the media. Surely everyone has figured that out by now. Casey's legal team is smearing Caylee's face in the mud even further than it was when her body was found. So sad. We agree about Nancy Grace though. I am no fan of hers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Magritte25 View Post
News - Casey Anthony Spotting Was a Hoax - InsideEdition.com

Nancy Grace is such an ignorant ass. WTF is she even talking about?!

I kind of LOLed about the hoax. Stupid media get what they deserve.
 
Old 07-20-2011, 07:20 PM
 
Location: Tampa (by way of Omaha)
13,945 posts, read 19,196,130 times
Reputation: 9175
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzarama View Post
Several of us must have a different definition of the word 'speculation' than you do.
Obviously. I'm not sure what everyone else is using, but I prefer to use the actual meaning.

Quote:
Do you consider the accidental drowning Not speculation because Baez said that it happened?
Baez did not say it happened, Casey did. Baez was just the vehicle used to convey that since she, like most defendants, does not take the stand.

Here is the actual quote taken from the opening statement.

Quote:
"As Casey came around the corner [of the pool] she saw George Anthony holding Caylee in his arms," the defense attorney told the jury. "She immediately grabbed Caylee and began to cry. Shortly thereafter, George began to yell at her: 'Look what you've done. Your mother will never forgive you and you will go to jail for child neglect for the rest of your frigging life.'"
Casey Anthony's Legal Team Shocks Court, Claims Daughter Drowned

As you see, that isn't a "well this might have happened" statement. It was a statement made with first hand knowledge. The former would be speculation, the later is not.

Quote:
Rules of Deliberation #2 states --- "This case must be decided only upon the evidence that you have heard from the testimony of the witnesses and have seen in the form of the exhibits in evidence and these instructions."

I can't check now, but the judge also might have told jurors the opening statements aren't evidence.
Since testimony (the defense questioning George) and evidence (the pictures) were entered, it can be considered.

Quote:
IIRC, the only supposed evidence of a drowning were that Caylee could open a glass door leading to the pool area, the ladder was up, and Caylee was able to climb the ladder. I mean, really, do you consider that 'evidence' that a drowning happened ? Today 08:16 PM
They show that it was possible that she drowned. That possibility is the foundation for reasonable doubt.
 
Old 07-20-2011, 07:21 PM
 
28,206 posts, read 20,799,235 times
Reputation: 16599
Quote:
Originally Posted by carolac View Post
I disagree with this. The hoax, if it was one, is not one to laugh about. A little girl is dead and her mom's attorneys are making a mockery of it. The Anthony's got the media involved to help find their granddaughter. It was Casey's own mysterious actions that brought this frenzy on. You can't have it both ways with the media. Surely everyone has figured that out by now. Casey's legal team is smearing Caylee's face in the mud even further than it was when her body was found. So sad. We agree about Nancy Grace though. I am no fan of hers.
Casey's lawyers had nothing to do with this hoax.

So the media gets to just say whatever they want, have no ethical responsibility because three years ago the family went to them for help in locating the girl? I think not.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > True Crime
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top