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 07-05-2011, 08:42 PM
 
Location: Wyoming
9,420 posts, read 17,401,654 times
Reputation: 14094

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper 88 View Post
... How in this earth 12 people could conclude that she was totally innnocent is beyond me, but it happened.... I cant blame jeff ashton for retiring one bit. He is probly asking himself, "whats all this for if a jury presented with astounding evidence caanot come back with a guilty verdict" ?
The jury, each and every one of them, did not find her "totally innocent" but "not guilty" beyond a reasonable doubt. Each juror agreed with that verdict. They each sat through the entire trial and heard all that they were legally allowed to hear.

Ashton obviously didn't present enough "astounding evidence" or he would have won the case.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CarolinaWoman View Post
... They asked no questions about the charges and the charges were very confusing....
I'm sure they were given the charges and instructions in writing. Legally worded instructions are not that hard to understand if you read them carefully. If someone on the jury had problems understanding something, others on the jury could probably explain it without asking the judge to explain it to one person.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bentlebee View Post
How long before one of these jurors comes to the conclusion they made a mistake when they find out more, or hear what we heard following the court case...

They have to live with their ruling, even if Casey commits another crime...not that we can blame that on them, but not even aggrevated child abuse....I wonder who they think left a toddler in the swamp like garbage..
I've been on a number of juries (thankfully none for murder) and I've never seen ANY juror who didn't take the job very seriously. My feeling on it is that even if the defendant was guilty, it wasn't the jury that made the mistake but the prosecution that didn't prove its case.

I'm sure every juror asked him/herself who could have left the toddler in the swamp, and most, if not all, of them probably suspect that it was Casey, but they're not sure. And you're not sure either, unless it was you.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taratova View Post
They never looked for the truth. Never asked a question . Just like in the OJ trial. Caylee wasn't worth it to them! They did not take it seriously at all. They wanted to go home.

May they know the truth sooner or later. May it follow them that they let a murderer free.
Have you even sat on a jury trial? I can assure you that they all wished they could know "the truth" for certain. They wished the prosecution could have proven beyond ANY doubt that she was guilty. Instead they had to determine what was "beyond a reasonable doubt".

They each decided it wasn't proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Casey was guilty. We're not talking about some goofball who couldn't convict her. That's why we have a dozen people on these juries. And each and every one of them voted the same way. If you want to lay blame, blame the state.

 
Old 07-05-2011, 08:46 PM
 
Location: southern born and southern bred
12,478 posts, read 14,956,164 times
Reputation: 19530
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
Does it strike anyone else as "cruel and unusual punishment", for the judge, who knew the verdict, to make the defendant sit there and wait several hours before hearing it?

LOL!!!!! Yea, I was crying bout it
What IS cruel and unusual punishment is being a helpless 2 year old who trusts that her MOTHER will defend her with her own life and having said mother kill the 2 year old child then go party down.
 
Old 07-05-2011, 08:50 PM
 
Location: California
1,028 posts, read 1,144,050 times
Reputation: 828
Quote:
Originally Posted by WyoNewk View Post

They each decided it wasn't proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Casey was guilty. We're not talking about some goofball who couldn't convict her. That's why we have a dozen people on these juries. And each and every one of them voted the same way. If you want to lay blame, blame the state.
I think they misunderstood beyond a reasonable doubt to me no doubts whatsoever. There will always be doubts. You can't even be 100% sure that you actually exist. What you do is take all of the circumstantial and substantial evidence and determine what that proves beyond a reasonable doubt, not just any doubts whatsoever. The evidence clearly proved that Casey Anthony was involved in the unlawful death of her child and tried to cover it up. Whether that was first degree murder or negligent homicide, we will never know.

Let me put it this way, what reasonable explanation is there for Casey lying to relatives about where Caylee was after disappearance, and then making up a "Zanny the Nanny" story, and deliberately lying to police during their investigation? If there is no other reasonable explanation for this behavior other than that she murdered her child, I think this proves it beyond a reasonable doubt.
 
Old 07-05-2011, 08:51 PM
 
Location: Florida
21,660 posts, read 11,130,115 times
Reputation: 7888
Quote:
Originally Posted by WyoNewk View Post
The jury, each and every one of them, did not find her "totally innocent" but "not guilty" beyond a reasonable doubt. Each juror agreed with that verdict. They each sat through the entire trial and heard all that they were legally allowed to hear.

Ashton obviously didn't present enough "astounding evidence" or he would have won the case.



I'm sure they were given the charges and instructions in writing. Legally worded instructions are not that hard to understand if you read them carefully. If someone on the jury had problems understanding something, others on the jury could probably explain it without asking the judge to explain it to one person.



I've been on a number of juries (thankfully none for murder) and I've never seen ANY juror who didn't take the job very seriously. My feeling on it is that even if the defendant was guilty, it wasn't the jury that made the mistake but the prosecution that didn't prove its case.

I'm sure every juror asked him/herself who could have left the toddler in the swamp, and most, if not all, of them probably suspect that it was Casey, but they're not sure. And you're not sure either, unless it was you.



Have you even sat on a jury trial? I can assure you that they all wished they could know "the truth" for certain. They wished the prosecution could have proven beyond ANY doubt that she was guilty. Instead they had to determine what was "beyond a reasonable doubt".

They each decided it wasn't proven beyond a reasonable doubt that Casey was guilty. We're not talking about some goofball who couldn't convict her. That's why we have a dozen people on these juries. And each and every one of them voted the same way. If you want to lay blame, blame the state.
Hasn't everyone sat in on trial or most of us. This jury were gutless and didn't have the mind to convict a murderer. Let's just say they didn't have a backbone to decide on the truth because the death penalty was involved. they wanted to go home and enjoy their life and the heck with justice!
 
Old 07-05-2011, 09:00 PM
 
Location: High Cotton
6,131 posts, read 6,444,619 times
Reputation: 3657
Quote:
Originally Posted by UNLV09 View Post
I think they misunderstood beyond a reasonable doubt to me no doubts whatsoever. There will always be doubts. You can't even be 100% sure that you actually exist. What you do is take all of the circumstantial and substantial evidence and determine what that proves beyond a reasonable doubt, not just any doubts whatsoever. The evidence clearly proved that Casey Anthony was involved in the unlawful death of her child and tried to cover it up. Whether that was first degree murder or negligent homicide, we will never know.

Let me put it this way, what reasonable explanation is there for Casey lying to relatives about where Caylee was after disappearance, and then making up a "Zanny the Nanny" story, and deliberately lying to police during their investigation? If there is no other reasonable explanation for this behavior other than that she murdered her child, I think this proves it beyond a reasonable doubt.
Totally agree!
 
Old 07-05-2011, 09:20 PM
 
Location: in my mind
4,756 posts, read 6,536,089 times
Reputation: 9496
For all the avid posters on this thread- I would like to toss this one out to you:

Please post YOUR particular theory as to what happened to Cayley.

I would like to hear some different scenarios here.

I will go first:

I think that Casey somehow sedated the child, I am thinking with xanax because I somehow cannot see Casey, as unstable as her life appeared to be during that month of June- July, being able to take the time to make choloform and then actually using it.

Since she was spending so much time at Fusion and other clubs during that month (see the transcripts of interviews to see that this was a new behavior for her that began in early June), I think she tried sedating Cayley while she went out clubbing.

I think she came back to find the child deceased and perhaps drove around for a day or more with her in the trunk, trying to figure out what to do.

I think she went back to her parent's and got the blanket and bag and tape from their home and this is when she asked for the shovel, because maybe she thought she would bury her.

She then dumped the body in the woods near her home.

I think she wanted to abandon her car at this time and that is when she left it in the parking lot. She had told a friend that she thought her father hit an animal and the dead animal was stuck to the front of the car prior to when she left it there without gas. That was her explanation for why there was a bad smell in the car (at least as she told her friend- the friend didn't actually smell it).

She then relied on her boyfriend's car and then her friend Amy Z's car for transportation for the next couple of weeks.

For those who want to read about the timeline in more detail,

on this page, scroll down to almost the bottom and read the two posts by "momtective" the first dated 9-11-2008 - and then the post by the same person immediately after that one-

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/arc...p/t-67828.html

then, someone else made a calendar of the events in May, June, July 2008- if you click on "download" and then just cancel after it brings a pop up window, you can then open the calendar to view full screen, zoom, etc.

My Timeline Calendar
 
Old 07-05-2011, 09:32 PM
 
288 posts, read 133,806 times
Reputation: 110
Quote:
Originally Posted by UNLV09 View Post
Since when does a lack of evidence mean someone is innocent of a crime? All it means is the crime cannot be proven.
Not more answers to your questions. I'm now convinced that you're not an attorney.
 
Old 07-05-2011, 09:38 PM
 
Location: Out West
22,759 posts, read 16,836,071 times
Reputation: 26301
Quote:
Originally Posted by UNLV09 View Post
Ummm...have you ever done a case brief? I've seen case briefs in as little as three paragraphs. Sometimes you get a much clearer prospective from reading a case brief. Your mind gets all discombobulated sometimes sitting in a courtroom for weeks on end listening to lawyers and experts argue. By the end of the trial you don't know what to believe. Case brief in this situation would read "Suspect didn't report missing child to police, lied to family saying that the child was with a nanny when they wanted to see her, she lied to detectives when they were attempting to investigate Caylee's disappearance, the body was found 15 houses away from hers with duct tape on the mouth, according to decomposition experts her trunk smelled like human decomposition..." GUILTY!

Even Casey supporters like you and Morgain admit that at the least, Casey was guilty of negligent homicide, which means she should be in prison. The rest of us feel she is guilty of first or second degree murder, which means she should be in prison. Either way, the law didn't work today.
My point was, case briefs are not used in trials...meaning, jurors do not get one paragraph case briefs to come to their conclusions.

And no, I would not say, "GUILTY" based on that case brief, we have a judicial system in place for a reason and again, no matter if people liked the verdict or not, the justice system worked.

I am not a Casey supporter. I AM a supporter in our justice system. Do NOT put words in to my mouth. I like to work with facts not emotion when it comes to things like this and the fact is, they did not prove, in my opinion, beyond a reasonable doubt, that she murdered her child.

Do I believe that child died because of negligence? Yep, I sure do. But, I wasn't on the jury, I didn't get to cast my verdict and I accept that those 12 jurors made their decisions based on what they heard in court, again, the system worked. To explain this one more time, the prosecutors present their side, the defense presents their side. It is the job of the prosecutors to show that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. To some people, including the jurors, that was not done by the prosecutor. THAT is what I support.

I do NOT make my decisions based on what the media says. ESPECIALLY blowhards like Nancy Grace who was relentless for three years.

In this country, people are innocent until proven guilty. The jury did not believe she was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. We do not try and hang someone before they've had their "day in court" and people were already convinced she was guilty of everything before she ever went to trial. I do not support that. I support our justice system and how it works whether I agree with the verdict or not.

That goes for anyone, not just Casey Anthony.
 
Old 07-05-2011, 09:51 PM
 
Location: Florida
21,660 posts, read 11,130,115 times
Reputation: 7888
Quote:
Originally Posted by GatorMama View Post
My point was, case briefs are not used in trials...meaning, jurors do not get one paragraph case briefs to come to their conclusions.

And no, I would not say, "GUILTY" based on that case brief, we have a judicial system in place for a reason and again, no matter if people liked the verdict or not, the justice system worked.

I am not a Casey supporter. I AM a supporter in our justice system. Do NOT put words in to my mouth. I like to work with facts not emotion when it comes to things like this and the fact is, they did not prove, in my opinion, beyond a reasonable doubt, that she murdered her child.

Do I believe that child died because of negligence? Yep, I sure do. But, I wasn't on the jury, I didn't get to cast my verdict and I accept that those 12 jurors made their decisions based on what they heard in court, again, the system worked. To explain this one more time, the prosecutors present their side, the defense presents their side. It is the job of the prosecutors to show that the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. To some people, including the jurors, that was not done by the prosecutor. THAT is what I support.

I do NOT make my decisions based on what the media says. ESPECIALLY blowhards like Nancy Grace who was relentless for three years.

In this country, people are innocent until proven guilty. The jury did not believe she was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. We do not try and hang someone before they've had their "day in court" and people were already convinced she was guilty of everything before she ever went to trial. I do not support that. I support our justice system and how it works whether I agree with the verdict or not.

That goes for anyone, not just Casey Anthony.

The problem is with this jury. They did NOT LOOK AT THE CIRCUMSTANCIAL EVIDENCE!!

The system failed!! The pundits did not change , add or take away the facts of the circumstancial evidence!
 
Old 07-05-2011, 09:55 PM
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
1,164 posts, read 1,740,053 times
Reputation: 1001
Quote:
Originally Posted by CTGirlNoMore View Post
Even if Caylee truly accidentally drowned, someone had to do the rest - duct tape on her face/hair? Body found in a swamp months later? No one reported her missing for a month?

*shakes head*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miss Crabcakes View Post
UN-EFFING-BELIEVABLE!!!!

I honestly thought her guilt was piled miles high!

Who the hell does not report their only child missing for a month? THen goes partying on with friends, who did not know anything about it? Who also fabricates an entire lie about her whereabouts and makes up a fake baby sitter?? WHo also had chloroform and neckbreaking searched on her computer and the sent of remains in her trunk. Who??? Who does that but someone that has plenty to hide and also someone that has a daughter missing??? She killed her or had something to do with it. This is outrageous to me!

I feel like Scott Peterson got convicted on lesser evidence in Lacy's murder.

The jurors failed.
My thoughts exactly.

If Caylee did possibly "drown", why was her mouth taped with ductape, her remains put in the trunk in a bag, and dumped in the woods? Many kids drown in pools each year and most people don't do to their kids what was done to Caylee. What kind of mother doesn't report her daughter missing for a month and goes out partying with her friends instead? If it were a real "drowning", it would have been reported immediately with paramedics on the scene and this case would have never been a national news story.

Actions speak louder than words and Casey's actions after Caylee went missing spoke volumes.

Sometimes I wonder where the common sense has gone...
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