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.
One thing that I haven't seen anyone mention on this thread is that the pattern of behavior that Casey exhibited during June and July of 2008 (lying extensively to everyone in her life) was not new behavior. This is the pattern of behavior she had been engaging in for at least the past couple of years.
So, regardless of what actually happened to Caylee (accidental drowning, smothering with chloroform, etc), Casey didn't change her behavior - she did the same thing she has always done. She made up stories about where she was, who she was with, what she was doing.
No one in her family should be surprised at all that whether it was an accident or a murder, Casey is not going to tell the truth about it. They would be foolish to expect otherwise. It would be very aberrant for her TO have told anyone what actually happened to Caley.
So her lying did was not "evidence" that she murdered her child. It was a "normal" pattern for her.
As a law student, I'm always interested in how juries come to amke a decision so I'm probably the wrong person to ask that question.
I've never been a juror (probably won't ever be) and their deliberations are always secret. So I've always wondered what effect the various instructions and presentation of facts have on people's decision making.
You would be surprised and appalled. Odd and irrelevant things - often times including things they were specifically instructed not to consider. It can range from opinions on the lawyers to wanting to get done by a particular time (eg. Friday afternoon before a weekend). (Yes Juror I have a vacation - I am giving you the sideeye).
As I thought of it - another thing that angers me is permitting 31 days to lapse with the child missing when the entire family knew if her mouth was moving Casey was telling a lie. Of course no one could have imagined what happened, but still 31 days was a gift to her that was clearly priceless.
Interesting...the family knew she was a liar...yet they believed the lies for a month about Caylee being gone with her...
People all the way in the back of the courtroom heard what the clerk asked. The juror heard too but she said "Pardon?" because she didn't understand what she was being asked. When the clerk repeated it she said "Not guilty", when that wasn't the question that was asked. That's why the clerk had to ask her a third time and she finally said "Yes." Go watch it again before posting.
I don't have to watch it again. You seem to think that simply because someone asked, "pardon?" that proves they are an idiot. Remember that the next time you have to ask someone to repeat themselves because you didn't hear what they said.
Well, I see no one answered my question...which is about what I figured would happen. And pretty much tells me all I need to know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by I_Love_LI_but
Oh NOW she says they're crying ... sure ... how transparent. She's saying what she thinks people want to hear her say so she isn't "villianized" and isn't asked "hard questions" while she earns a few bucks off the tabloid news.
First people were pissed off because they DIDN'T talk, now people are pissed off because they do.
There is no sense here. I'm spent. See ya at the next "big trial"...as someone said on another thread, when the talking heads tell us what we are supposed to be interested in next.
So her lying did was not "evidence" that she murdered her child. It was a "normal" pattern for her.
I've never claimed she murdered her child.
That would be foolish to do because at this point no one knows what happened to Caylee.
I think Casey had something to do with the child's death. Her exact role- there is no way to know.
But when her child disappeared, Casey did stay completely true to form and created extensive fabricated tales about her whereabouts during that time. Tales that changed and shifted depending on who she was talking to or what day it was.
And for that, I believe she should be held accountable in some manner -
a) if she knew the child died of accident - she should have reported it
b) if she knew that a real actual person took her child - she should have reported it the second it happened to law enforcement
c) if she killed the child - then I would not expect her to report it, although there are many cases where someone does confess to murder when eventually confronted - but regardless, anyone who kills a child should be in prison
. See ya at the next "big trial"...as someone said on another thread, when the talking heads tell us what we are supposed to be interested in next
Well have fun because I will NEVER follow another trial as intently as I have this one only to subject myself to this confused, incomplete feeling that I am feeling now.
Well, I see no one answered my question...which is about what I figured would happen. And pretty much tells me all I need to know.
First people were pissed off because they DIDN'T talk, now people are pissed off because they do.
There is no sense here. I'm spent. See ya at the next "big trial"...as someone said on another thread, when the talking heads tell us what we are supposed to be interested in next.
Understand the feeling. I'm spent too! It gets exhausting talking to a wall.
Sentencing will be tomorrow at 9am. I'm hoping she gets additional time for lying to authorities. If I had to guess, I'd say the Casey supporters in this thread are hoping she is released immediately?
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.