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 08-05-2011, 05:02 AM
 
9,525 posts, read 4,865,520 times
Reputation: 3870

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Three Wolves In Snow View Post
[snip]What the lady appeared to be like is not factual. It's an opinion. And Dr. G stated that it could not be determined how the child died...what she added to that was her opinion as the tape was not found on the child's mouth.
The next time you watch a trial keep in mind that jurors are instructed to consider how the witnesses acted, as well as what they said. There's nothing wrong with a juror or message board poster considering what a witness 'appeared to be like.'

 
Old 08-05-2011, 05:21 AM
 
28,206 posts, read 20,731,674 times
Reputation: 16599
I wonder what impact this attitude towards the Casey jury will have on other trials. Kind of scares me to think about it.
 
Old 08-05-2011, 10:22 AM
 
Location: Out West
22,707 posts, read 16,808,575 times
Reputation: 26282
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarolinaWoman View Post
I thought you watched the trial??? The 'bug man' ... Timothy Huntington from the University of Nebraska that testified for Baez ... you know blow flies ... maggots ... Huntington compared putting a dead pig in the trunk of a car in Nebraska comparing it to a dead baby in the trunk of a car in Florida!! You remember surely ... gag city ... he said you can get DNA from maggots if they just ate a body!!! Are you sure you watched the entire trial. That testimony made me gag but I hung in there.

Also ... Dr. G said and this is a direct quote "There is no child that should have duct tape on its face when it dies. There is no reason to put duct tape on the face after they die. Based on our experience, we've seen this in cases of homicide." I can refer you to the date and tape number if you like.

No everyone in Florida is not stupid. LOL I was just disappointed in the verdict and would have preferred a hung jury to the not guilty ... but a hung jury would have meant another trial and more expense to the taxpayers.
I did watch the trial, I thought you were saying I could not possibly understand the smell since I do not live in Florida...lack of reading comprehension on my part. I was replying to that saying I did live in FL and therefore DO know what it can smell like but nevermind, I misunderstood that you were not talking about MY persona experience.

I know what Dr. G said. But the duct tape was NOT on the child's face. That is MY point.
 
Old 08-05-2011, 11:22 AM
 
Location: Tampa (by way of Omaha)
13,925 posts, read 19,139,910 times
Reputation: 9155
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarolinaWoman View Post
Do you live in Florida ... how can you compare a dead pig in the trunk of a vehicle in Nebraska to a dead child or even a dead pig in a trunk of a vehicle in Florida. Common sense, common sense there is no comparison in temperatures!
Omaha is my home town and I live in Florida now. The difference in temperature is not all that great, with Orlando being only about 5 degrees warmer on average through the summer.

Quote:
Originally Posted by kimba01 View Post
You know the difficulty is that Bosco has never said whether he "thinks" she did it or not. And I am talking just his thoughts, not based on the trial solely. I am not talking about whether she should have been convicted or not. So, I think this makes it harder for people to listen to his "RATIONAL thoughts". That's fine, no one has to say what they personally think, but it just comes off as this cold, hard person who thinks that this whole debacle is ok. I understand his point, legally. I understand there wasn't enough evidence. I do not agree with the verdict. I don't have to, but I do have to accept that she walked with zero consequences. I do believe CA either did it or was involved in it. Shame either way.
That's because my opinion of her guilt is entirely irrelevant to the criminal trial, but since you asked I'll come out and tell you that I have no idea whether she is guilty or not. Unlike some here claim to be, I am not omnipresent, so I really don't know.
 
Old 08-05-2011, 12:15 PM
 
Location: Out West
22,707 posts, read 16,808,575 times
Reputation: 26282
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimba01 View Post
Because, like you said, sometimes people get away with crimes. I don't care WHO you are or how good you are at concealing your emotions, you know. Yes, it wasn't proven enough to that jury and so be it. That's the system. Let the people be emotional. There should be emotion surrounding a tragic death of an innocent person. There will always be those who disagree. If she had been convicted, you would be writing in a thread about the travesty of that. It's people. It's a public forum. We are all different, with different minds. Let it be hard. It should be. Laws have been changed, some for the better, some for the worse, by public outcries and disagreements to situations. Big difference is we didn't have public forums or social media, worldwide, to air these outcries. We do now. It will never be different. I suggest if someone is tired of pushing their point, either move on or continue to educate. I suggest it be done on a level of relative respect to those who may not have your education, your opinions, your ability to remain emotionless, or your logic. Face it, you can not change everyone's thought processes. You can provide what you feel or know and they can take it or leave it.

You know the difficulty is that Bosco has never said whether he "thinks" she did it or not. And I am talking just his thoughts, not based on the trial solely. I am not talking about whether she should have been convicted or not. So, I think this makes it harder for people to listen to his "RATIONAL thoughts". That's fine, no one has to say what they personally think, but it just comes off as this cold, hard person who thinks that this whole debacle is ok. I understand his point, legally. I understand there wasn't enough evidence. I do not agree with the verdict. I don't have to, but I do have to accept that she walked with zero consequences. I do believe CA either did it or was involved in it. Shame either way.


This is not a third world country where people have to do crazy things to prove their "rapes". The justice system can be tweaked when needed, if needed. We have great minds to do that and the good sense to know it.
If someone has a well written and thought out post, I do respect it, even if I don't agree with it. What I tire of is the endless, "Florida people are stupid! The jury is stupid! They should have 'stupid' tattooed to their faces". That is NOT a well thought out argument.

I also get tired of people repeating what they heard on t.v. that has been shown, time and again, was not true. They listen to sound bytes or opinions of talking heads and make it their own. CA was considered "guilty" long before she ever had her day in court. That is a dangerous way of being. In this country, you are innocent until proven guilty. CA was not proven guilty. Whether we like that or not, we have to accept that she was found, "not guilty" of the charges against her. Emphasis on the last part, "OF the charges against her".

What do I think about CA's involvement? I feel strongly that she was involved, somehow, whether directly or indirectly, I am certain that she knows what happened. Is she guilty of murder? No proof. Is she guilty of manslaughter? No proof. Is she guilty of child abuse? No proof. Is she guilty of something? I think she knows what happened and I think she lied her ass off to the police and everyone around her. Well, we know she lied to the police, she was charged with that.

However, her actions alone prove nothing more than she's a selfish little twit. (That last part of the sentence was opinion.) We have no proof that she did anything. This is all I'm trying to set straight.

We can FEEL and THINK she did something, but the fact remains, there just wasn't the proof. Nancy Graces' assessments and sound bytes are not proof.

I was shocked by the whole thing, absolutely. Unfortunately, they didn't charge her with something she couldn't get out of...I'm not a lawyer, I don't know what to charge her with but do I THINK she's guilty in some manner? Absolutely. The level of that guilt and her involvement, I don't know. We may never know.
 
Old 08-05-2011, 12:20 PM
 
Location: Old Town Alexandria
14,505 posts, read 23,769,243 times
Reputation: 8838
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarolinaWoman View Post
Common sense which the Pinellas 12 didn't have ... there was plenty of evidence but the jury had other things on their mind ... gotta get outta here ... if we find her guilty it means we have to stay for the 'Sentencing Phase' ... another juror was leaving for Europe on July 7 no refund on trip ... hurry up hurry up ... what we having for lunch .... put your glad rags on today we need to look good ... let's hit the road Jack!
Yes, and thats the truly sad part. New laws should be legislated. These posting people should just accept a murderer should just walk free, does that mean they think no new laws can be legislated?. 31 days not REPORTING A DEAD CHILD.31 DAYS THINK ABOUT IT.

justicequestforum has people advocating for just that. New laws for child neglect. lol at the poster mentioning caseys constitutional rights
 
Old 08-05-2011, 12:27 PM
 
28,206 posts, read 20,731,674 times
Reputation: 16599
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreamofmonterey View Post
Yes, and thats the truly sad part. New laws should be legislated. These posting people should just accept a murderer should just walk free, does that mean they think no new laws can be legislated?. 31 days not REPORTING A DEAD CHILD.31 DAYS THINK ABOUT IT.

justicequestforum has people advocating for just that. New laws for child neglect. lol at the poster mentioning caseys constitutional rights
What does that mean now?
 
Old 08-05-2011, 12:32 PM
 
Location: Nassau, Long Island, NY
16,408 posts, read 28,880,032 times
Reputation: 7268
Quote:
Originally Posted by dreamofmonterey View Post
Yes, and thats the truly sad part. New laws should be legislated. These posting people should just accept a murderer should just walk free, does that mean they think no new laws can be legislated?. 31 days not REPORTING A DEAD CHILD.31 DAYS THINK ABOUT IT.

justicequestforum has people advocating for just that. New laws for child neglect. lol at the poster mentioning caseys constitutional rights
Isn't it sad that there has to be an adjustment to law to ensure that if a child goes "missing" (term used loosely in Caylee Anthony's sad case) parents have to report it? And to think this is Casey Anthony's number one accomplishment in life and, if passed, will be one of her claims to lifelong "fame."
 
Old 08-05-2011, 01:42 PM
 
11,151 posts, read 14,142,156 times
Reputation: 18796
Since the trial is over and the verdict is in, and since nothing new is being said in this thread, it's time to shut it down.
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