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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-06-2011, 07:46 PM
 
25,879 posts, read 39,142,774 times
Reputation: 13869

Advertisements

HNL might have made a lot of money because so many people watched it and they deserve it, their main motto was "justice for Caylee" something she didn't get and I will be the last one to judge HNL for reporting this. Thanks HNL for great coverage!

Any one who wants to read a book of a lying person, is free to do so, but I would suggest to spend money on a charity to help abused kids or parents of murdered kids and I don't mean Casey, but parents who were not involved!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-07-2011, 06:28 AM
 
25,879 posts, read 39,142,774 times
Reputation: 13869
The State Attorney's office is going to file a motion to recover the money due to the obstruction/lies of Casey which was causing this case to be so much more expensive and so the tax payers money will be paid back.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2011, 06:50 AM
 
Location: South Carolina
13,821 posts, read 18,779,327 times
Reputation: 24495
I really resent the fact that the jurors are making money . To me that is nothing but blood money . And did I hear right one of the jurors has hired a publicist ? why do you need a publicist unless you are planning are writing a book and to me if even a juror writes a book about this case or is on any magazine cover I will absoloutly boycott that magazine and def not buy the book . Im sorry but that is horendous to make money off the death of a precious little girl .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2011, 07:36 AM
 
59 posts, read 35,476 times
Reputation: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by phonelady61 View Post
I really resent the fact that the jurors are making money . To me that is nothing but blood money . And did I hear right one of the jurors has hired a publicist ? why do you need a publicist unless you are planning are writing a book and to me if even a juror writes a book about this case or is on any magazine cover I will absoloutly boycott that magazine and def not buy the book . Im sorry but that is horendous to make money off the death of a precious little girl .
What about various psychologists, body language experts, and law enforcement analysts that choose to write books about the trial? What about Nancy Grace?

I don't necessarily think selling your view about the trial is a bad thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2011, 08:46 AM
 
Location: South Carolina
13,821 posts, read 18,779,327 times
Reputation: 24495
Quote:
Originally Posted by matt30 View Post
What about various psychologists, body language experts, and law enforcement analysts that choose to write books about the trial? What about Nancy Grace?

I don't necessarily think selling your view about the trial is a bad thing.
Are you serious ? you see nothing wrong with making money off a dead little girl ? Then I would safely say this world needs to re examine its morals and scope of what is right and wrong .
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2011, 09:51 AM
 
59 posts, read 35,476 times
Reputation: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by phonelady61 View Post
Are you serious ? you see nothing wrong with making money off a dead little girl ? Then I would safely say this world needs to re examine its morals and scope of what is right and wrong .
I don't understand what you mean. Are you saying none of those people should make money off the trial? If that's the case, I don't agree with you

Or only the jurors? I don't really agree with that either because they're not doing anything different than the journalists. What about the retiring prosecutor? What if the Judge writes a biography? I think the line you're drawing is too arbitrary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2011, 09:57 AM
 
2,721 posts, read 3,744,524 times
Reputation: 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by matt30 View Post
I don't understand what you mean. Are you saying none of those people should make money off the trial? If that's the case, I don't agree with you

Or only the jurors? I don't really agree with that either because they're not doing anything different than the journalists. What about the retiring prosecutor? What if the Judge writes a biography? I think the line you're drawing is too arbitrary.
You can't see why the jury shouldn't be able to profit from a verdict?

If they found her guilty they would make less money
If they found her not guilty they would make more money

It is that simple... The idea of money in this case effected their verdict or had the possibility of effecting their verdict. This is why juries should never be able to profit from being in a trial. Even before the ruling I was telling people I think they will find her not guilty because there is more money involved in that verdict.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2011, 10:06 AM
 
59 posts, read 35,476 times
Reputation: 45
Quote:
Originally Posted by cyclone8570 View Post
You can't see why the jury shouldn't be able to profit from a verdict?

If they found her guilty they would make less money
If they found her not guilty they would make more money

It is that simple... The idea of money in this case effected their verdict or had the possibility of effecting their verdict. This is why juries should never be able to profit from being in a trial. Even before the ruling I was telling people I think they will find her not guilty because there is more money involved in that verdict.
That's crazy. So they all made an agreement to get money out of the deal by voting not guilty, even though they believed that the state proved their case? Totally crazy. Especially considering most of them won't make a dime off the case.

I'm not convinced they would have made less money if they found her guilty either. Most of them had no idea about the media hype surround this case.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2011, 10:36 AM
 
Location: South Carolina
13,821 posts, read 18,779,327 times
Reputation: 24495
Quote:
Originally Posted by matt30 View Post
That's crazy. So they all made an agreement to get money out of the deal by voting not guilty, even though they believed that the state proved their case? Totally crazy. Especially considering most of them won't make a dime off the case.

I'm not convinced they would have made less money if they found her guilty either. Most of them had no idea about the media hype surround this case.
Oh give me a break, jurors have tv dont they ? so they had some idea of how the media hype was going to be . I wonder if there would have been a different verdict if she was from a low class family or if she were hispanic ,or black ? Makes one wonder if they would have been so hot to trot to write a book then hmmm....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-07-2011, 10:50 AM
 
12,273 posts, read 18,397,848 times
Reputation: 19098
Quote:
Originally Posted by matt30 View Post
I don't understand what you mean. Are you saying none of those people should make money off the trial? If that's the case, I don't agree with you

Or only the jurors? I don't really agree with that either because they're not doing anything different than the journalists. What about the retiring prosecutor? What if the Judge writes a biography? I think the line you're drawing is too arbitrary.
There is a potential conflict of interests, even if only illusionary, since they had a decision in the final outcome. The judge and the jury, can, but shouldn't, profit from the case because of that appearance of conflict. Sleazy without a doubt.

Any others, including prosecution and defense attorneys, did not have a final say in the verdict (although you might perhaps argue that the attorneys did). Now if they write books - it's clearly exploitive, perhaps sleazeball like depending on how it's presented. Casey profiting? Well, clearly that is sleazy beyond reproach, but also clearly not beneath her based on prior conduct.

Journalists - these are 3rd parties not related to the case. Expolitive, or not, depending on how presented. These same journalists will gladly pay Anthony or the jurists for interviews (not appropriate journalistic conduct in my opinion to pay for new from any source for any purpose, it's bad practice), therefore becoming part of the problem and entering "sleazeball" territory.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

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