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.
The thing I would like to know is, who came up with the George is the bad guy defense? Baez or Casey?
If he would have left George out and stuck to the accident by drowning, he would have had a much better chance.
Casey could have said that Caylee was already dead, she was afraid to tell her parents, flipped out and blocked the whole thing out of her mind because it was too painful to face. I'm sure they could have found some "expert" Doctor to go along with that.
"Oh Mom, I didn't want to hurt you" and George and Cindy would still be in her corner.
Who came up with this defense?
Juror 4: THE CHURCH LADY
The never married woman is in her late 40s and lives alone. Deeply religious, she did not want to be selected, saying, "I don't like to judge people." Anthony's defense fought to keep her on the jury.
The legal system works in this fashion - the jury is not seated by 12 of the most objective jurists the legal system can find. The judge does not pick the jurists - the opposing sides do. It is populated by 6 of the most prejudicial people that defense can find, and 6 of the most prejudicial people that the prosecution can find more or less (through a dealmaking, give and take, processes between the two sides).
Trials are indeed won during the jury process. Because this is a sequestered jury you already have a unrepresentative population - government workers (rejects from private industry), the unemployable (not the unemployed - they are busy looking for jobs and the judge would have exempted them), a few of societies outliers. Lets hope there are no real wackos on this trial, all it takes is one. Church Lady may indeed be it.
The legal system works in this fashion - the jury is not seated by 12 of the most objective jurists the legal system can find. The judge does not pick the jurists - the opposing sides do. It is populated by 6 of the most prejudicial people that defense can find, and 6 of the most prejudicial people that the prosecution can find more or less (through a dealmaking, give and take, processes between the two sides).
Trials are indeed won during the jury process. Because this is a sequestered jury you already have a unrepresentative population - government workers (rejects from private industry), the unemployable (not the unemployed - they are busy looking for jobs and the judge would have exempted them), a few of societies outliers. Lets hope there are no real wackos on this trial, all it takes is one. Church Lady may indeed be it.
If the defense has banked on a Church Lady stating she doesn't like to judge as a sure fire vote against the death penalty.....they made a serious mistake. As a middle aged church lady myself, I can say I would try to find an avenue of grace, but I would not hesitate for the death penalty if the premeditated murder of a child was proven without much doubt in play.
Also, not sure the jury isn't representative of society. Lots of people are willing to serve as jurors who are both government employees and those gainfully employed elsewhere. I have confidence in our local people (central Florida) being able to make a fair decision based on the evidence.
The thing I would like to know is, who came up with the George is the bad guy defense? Baez or Casey?
If he would have left George out and stuck to the accident by drowning, he would have had a much better chance.
Casey could have said that Caylee was already dead, she was afraid to tell her parents, flipped out and blocked the whole thing out of her mind because it was too painful to face. I'm sure they could have found some "expert" Doctor to go along with that.
"Oh Mom, I didn't want to hurt you" and George and Cindy would still be in her corner.
Who came up with this defense?
I so agree with you. I would've made it an ACCIDENT in some way. Not bring in another human being who obviously from previous taped conversations....had nothing to do with it. It's all too bazaar.
Baez isn't retarded. He knows she's guilty, he's just trying to give her a reasonable defense because it is his job to do so. And it is her right to get one.
Also, not sure the jury isn't representative of society. Lots of people are willing to serve as jurors who are both government employees and those gainfully employed elsewhere. I have confidence in our local people (central Florida) being able to make a fair decision based on the evidence.
Well, usually, the judge will make very liberal exemptions for sequestered jury - people that work in private industry, well you can't just tell your boss you are leaving for 3 months and the judge will exempt you....housewives and other family leaders - again you can't leave your family for 3 months. Anyone that has any issues living in a hotel away from everything for 3 months, i.e. - most of us, will be exempted very easily. Government employees work a bit different from private industry however. Probably because they don't care if a job gets done or not.
So you get a jury full of driver's license center employees (could be good or bad, but not usually the brightest of society), the elderly retired (usually good if not entering senality), and the guy living in his parent's basement working out a disability scam (usually bad).
The below article, related to the Simpson case, explains the problem's with a sequestered jury: "Many knowledgeable critics are convinced that sequestration is not all it's cracked up to be. Uelmen "can't imagine" trying such a ballyhooed case as Simpson's without shielding jurors from prejudicial publicity, but he believes "we need to find some sort of middle ground" so that jurors do not end up as soul-sapped prisoners. "I think where the system is most vulnerable is the pool of people willing and able to serve," says Simpson prosecutor Brian Kelberg. "How are we going to get a surgeon or a bank president?" The potential jurors for big, sequestered cases tend to be unrepresentative: older, less educated and largely female."
Well, usually, the judge will make very liberal exemptions for sequestered jury - people that work in private industry, well you can't just tell your boss you are leaving for 3 months....housewives and other family leaders - again you can't leave your family for 3 months. Anyone that has any issues living in a hotel away from everything for 3 months, i.e. - most of us, will be exempted very easily. Government employees work a bit different from private industry however. Probably because they don't care if a job gets done or not.
So you get a jury full of driver's license center employees (could be good or bad, but not usually the brightest of society), the elderly retired (usually good if not entering senality), and the guy living in his parent's basement working out a disability scam (usually bad).
Good points.
However, in a case this high profile, they will probably be interviewed for various media sources and crime television shows for years to come. Do they get paid for that? I would imagine....not sure.
Shoot, if I were on the jury, I would already have a book half written.
OK...I have to head for work. I'll be thinking about all you guys while I try to find a frigging parking place two blocks from the courthouse. We are having record heat and I know all the reporters are absolutely miserable.
This is a jury of her peers. They range in age from 32 to 65. They come from all walks of life. Pay is $30.00 a day. I do not have a description on the alternates.
Juror 1: THE NURSE
The married woman, 65, has two grown children. A retired nurse and volunteer counselor, she pays close attention to the proceedings. She also supports the death penalty. "I value life she said during jury selection, "but I also value the criminal justice system."
Juror 2: THE FAMILY MAN
During jury selection, this thirtysomething, married man told attorneys that his mom was a single mother "like Casey." An IT worker, he has a 9-year-old daughter and a 4-year-old son. Although he opposes the death penalty, he says he had some doubts of Anthony's innocence. "My impression was that, yes, I thought she did it," he said last month. "But if I had to return a verdict right now, I would say not guilty."
Juror 3: THE STUDENT
A 32-year-old single woman, she is working on her nursing degree. She often sits motionlessly and watches the trial with wide eyes. Soft-spoken and demure, she admits she knew little about the case before being selected for the jury. "I could be fair," she told attorneys. "I can't think of any reason why I wouldn't be."
Juror 4: THE CHURCH LADY
The never married woman is in her late 40s and lives alone. Deeply religious, she did not want to be selected, saying, "I don't like to judge people." Anthony's defense fought to keep her on the jury, where she shook her head as she heard about Anthony's repeated lies.
Juror 5: THE MOTHER
With long gray hair and glasses, the retired nurse's aide, 57, often has a frown on her face as she watches the trial. A mother of three children, she has an 11th-grade education and is the only juror with a criminal record: a DUI arrest from 1998. When asked whether she could vote for the death penalty, she was ambivalent. "I guess I believe in the death penalty," she said. "I'd have to know a lot of facts before I really considered it."
Juror 6: THE SALESMAN
The 33-year-old married man has two children, ages 6 and 22 months. He has a business degree and sells restaurant equipment. Throughout the proceedings, he has had trouble staying awake during the dry scientific testimony.
Juror 7: THE SECRETARY
The 41-year-old divorced secretary has always been around the law. Her father was an attorney, and she now works in juvenile justice welfare. During jury selection, she explained that she could give the death penalty if necessary. "It would be, gosh, a solemn decision," she said nervously, "but it is an option under the law."
Juror 8: THE POLICEMAN'S DAUGHTER
The defense was worried about this married customer service rep, 55, who has two sons approximately Casey Anthony's age. Her father was a police officer, and she has no problem with the death penalty. "If I know all the facts," she said, "I have no problem voting for the death penalty."
Juror 9: THE HANDYMAN
At 53, this single former logger sits close to the witnesses; he never takes his eyes off the courtroom proceedings. A native of Indiana, the thin, balding man does odd jobs to supplement his income as a caregiver for a stroke patient. "I don't think we've heard the whole story," he told the court. "I hold no bias."
Juror 10: THE BACHELOR
Tall and broad-shouldered, the 57-year-old has never been married and has no children. He works for a mobile phone company and spends a lot of time reading. When asked about the case, he admitted, "I don't know any details, but I believe everyone is innocent until proven guilty."
Juror 11: THE GYM TEACHER
The 33-year-old single man works as a high school gym teacher. Tall and handsome, he has gotten the nickname of "Johnny Depp" from some of the courthouse staff. He often leans forward during the shocking testimony. "Everyone I work with think she's guilty," he said in jury selection," but I can keep my mind open."
Juror 12: THE COOK
The sixty-ish woman has two children and one young grandchild. Working part time as a cook at a Publix supermarket, she often looks to the female prosecutor for reaction from the testimony. A fan of legal dramas, she says, "I have no problem deciding on the death penalty."
At least two of the Simpson jurists have written books.
If you are watching this trial, Cindy Anthony always has her head down and writing. I think that is where the book and movie will come from on the Anthony side.
These are a few....click on the link to read the others.
Quote:
Baez to Witness:"So you found, products that could be found in meat, and products that could be found in marijuana? ....Couldn't someone have had the munchies?"
Baez to Dr. Vass (expert witness): Do you know if people use paper towels to clean up raw meat?
Dr. Vass: How can I possibly testify to that?
Baez: "...so the decomposition could be from, say, a half eaten hamburger left in the trunk?"
Dr. Vass: "A person would have to eat 10 pounds of hamburger, it would have to be raw, and they would have to have eaten it while wearing a bag over their head."
Jose Baez to expert witness: “Sir, you’re not a piece of duct tape are you? So you can’t say your brand is my brand can you, sir.”
Baez to Detective Yuri Melich: “Did you ask her [Casey Anthony] if she ever committed suicide?”
Melich: "No. If she had ever committed suicide, she wouldn’t be able to answer my questions."
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.
