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.
According to trial experts and the jurors themselves, George and Cindy's testimony did not bring about the not guilty verdict, it was based on the fact that the prosecution could not prove how Caylee Anthony died and the fact that the case was overcharged.
Yet, the armchair quarterbacks here feel they know more than the experts and the jurors themselves.
Even with expert testimony based on air samples taken from the trunk of the car, that so-called evidence was discounted, so much for George's opinion or testimony on the matter.
Again, the Anthony's feeble attempts on the witness stand, and yes, they were feeble, to save their daughter from the death penalty, were not even egregious enough for the state to charge them with perjury.
Any parent out there who claims they wouldn't do the same to save their child from the death penalty considering NO ONE, not even the jurors, are sure, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Caylee's death was premeditated are incapable of empathy.
George and Cindy were put in a position of extreme emotional turmoil and far be it from me to pass judgment, especially considering I am not perfect and cannot honestly say what I would or wouldn't do if I ever found myself in their exact situation.
We will never know if the Anthony's would have felt compelled to lie if Casey wasn't facing the death penalty.
According to trial experts and the jurors themselves, George and Cindy's testimony did not bring about the not guilty verdict, it was based on the fact that the prosecution could not prove how Caylee Anthony died and the fact that the case was overcharged.
Yet, the armchair quarterbacks here feel they know more than the experts and the jurors themselves.
Even with expert testimony based on air samples taken from the trunk of the car, that so-called evidence was discounted, so much for George's opinion or testimony on the matter.
Again, the Anthony's feeble attempts on the witness stand, and yes, they were feeble, to save their daughter from the death penalty, were not even egregious enough for the state to charge them with perjury.
Any parent out there who claims they wouldn't do the same to save their child from the death penalty considering NO ONE, not even the jurors, are sure, beyond a reasonable doubt, that Caylee's death was premeditated are incapable of empathy.
George and Cindy were put in a position of extreme emotional turmoil and far be it from me to pass judgment, especially considering I am not perfect and cannot honestly say what I would or wouldn't do if I ever found myself in their exact situation.
We will never know if the Anthony's would have felt compelled to lie if Casey wasn't facing the death penalty.
This doesn't explain why George told two different stories on the decomp?
If defense hadn't made him the family scape goat he'd have stuck to his original story, right.
This doesn't explain why George told two different stories on the decomp?
If defense hadn't made him the family scape goat he'd have stuck to his original story, right.
I believe George explained that himself, saying at first he couldn't bring himself to believe his gut instinct, it was just too much, later the realization that Casey did have something to do with Caylee's death was beginning to sink in and George was able to accept what his gut was telling him.
I can't fault him for that under the extreme circumstances and the conflicting emotions he must have been going through at the time, simply brutal.
I can give the Anthony's some slack under the circumstances and it is sad that so many people can't.
On the other hand, one of the tow truck operators testified that the car smelled like a decomposing body but he didn't call the police.......yet, unlike George, HE isn't being vilified for HIS decision, why is that?
Why hold George and Cindy, who were under extreme emotional distress at the time, to a higher standard than a man who had no emotional involvement in this tragedy?
He either explained himself or he lied? And you believe lying under oath in a murder trials acceptable. I wouldn't do the same, but thanks for your honesty.
He either explained himself or he lied? And you believe lying under oath in a murder trials acceptable. I wouldn't do the same, but thanks for your honesty.
And even if you believed your child could be innocent, you would help the executioner put the noose around their neck, thanks for your honesty.
And even if you believed your child could be innocent, you would help the executioner put the noose around their neck, thanks for your honesty.
Speaking to the Anthony's, Cindy made the 911 call about missing Caylee including the smell of Caseys car. I'll repeat, George didn't smell decomp until trial testimony. He then changed his story to save himself, putting the guilt squarely on Casey.
"Could"?
As for me, If I knew my child was innocent, I'd tell the truth and pray defense would prevail.
Juries should not go into trial assuming parents testimonys are always a lie.
I believe George explained that himself, saying at first he couldn't bring himself to believe his gut instinct, it was just too much, later the realization that Casey did have something to do with Caylee's death was beginning to sink in and George was able to accept what his gut was telling him.
I can't fault him for that under the extreme circumstances and the conflicting emotions he must have been going through at the time, simply brutal.
I hope these two will settle their dysfunctional differences with some good mental healthcare. Dysfunctions not the same as grieving. All they have are each other; Casey and Caylee are no longer an excuse.
Speaking to the Anthony's, Cindy made the 911 call about missing Caylee including the smell of Caseys car. I'll repeat, George didn't smell decomp until trial testimony. He then changed his story to save himself, putting the guilt squarely on Casey.
"Could"?
As for me, If I knew my child was innocent, I'd tell the truth and pray defense would prevail.
Juries should not go into trial assuming parents testimonys are always a lie.
I will ask again, what about the tow truck operator who also testified he smelled what he believed was the odor of a decaying human body yet didn't call the police?
Why are you holding George and Cindy to a higher standard?
Gee, maybe the tow truck operator is trying to hide something too?
And, how exactly was the testimony about the smell coming from the car going to save George?
Casey's side of the story could have had George putting Caylee's body in the trunk of the car after she accidently drowned in the family pool, to be disposed of later.
If that story was the truth, how would George's testimony that he smelled a dead body in the car absolve him of any guilt?
Another thing, when a loved one, especially a parent, alibies someone on trial for committing a crime, of course the jury should not assume they are either lying or telling the truth.
A jury should, however, keep it in mind that it is a natural instinct {for most parents} to protect their child from harm and that could possibly taint their testimony.
Annie, Most of whats posted repetative back tracking. As I said we'll have to agree to disagree.
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.
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.
