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.
She is an expert about guilt and how guilty people behave.
No, she isn't. In fact there are wrongful convictions in this country, and those people were prosecuted by attorneys. Does this woman have any degrees in psychology and has she written any scholarly articles, subjected to peer review, about how a "guilty" person behaves? Obviously a prosecutor would have a strong bias. The defense expert had no bias. The verdict in this case doesn't benefit or negatively affect the expert witness in any way.
Nope the defense put part of the burden of proof on them with their ridiculous accusations and to follow the duct tape ....we listened and didn't hear any of their accusations and on top of that the defense stated Caylee died in the pool and Casey was there shortly after the fact and hid the truth....which is also a crime if that was true....she for sure wouldn't go so far to risk the death penalty if that was a true story.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morgain
You are applying logic to Casey which is not necessarily logical to her. I don't believe she really thinks through most of her actions. How many other lies did she tell to the boyfriend, about the family, etc., etc., BEFORE Caylee disappeared? Those just haven't been splashed all across the TV.
I guess what I'm objecting to is that there have been so many stories put out there about what Casey WANTED in her life. I'm not convinced that any of us really know what she wanted, that she WANTED to be rid of Caylee. If she didn't love that little girl, she couldn't have hidden her lack of feeling from all those people who spent a lot of time with her when Caylee was with her. If Caylee was so annoying to her, she couldn't have hidden that from her "boyfriends" when Caylee was sleeping over with her.
You are actually putting the burden of proof on the defense, and that's one of the reasons you're having trouble understanding why a jury might not find her guilty of murder. Remember, it is a requirement that the State prove their charges, beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt. I don't think the state met that burden. Accidental death is a very scenario. We do not have any uncontroverted evidence that the little girl died from suffocation.
My take on what Casey did was to use cholorform to put her to sleep,placed her in trunk to party and baby suffocated and after carrying her in trunk for several days had to do something with body and dumped her in woods.
''
that could be a possibility---did it not seem that there were many holes in the family dynamics that did not get fully addressed?was not the lack of eye contact between the family members and casey unusual???
Nope the defense put part of the burden of proof on them with their ridiculous accusations and to follow the duct tape ....we listened and didn't hear any of their accusations and on top of that the defense stated Caylee died in the pool and Casey was there shortly after the fact and hid the truth....which is also a crime if that was true....she for sure wouldn't go so far to risk the death penalty if that was a true story.
Not to worry. Casey is going to go to prison. She has admitted to lying to law enforcement....remember, Counts 4 thru 7? She will go to prison for those offenses, no doubt.
There's just no uncontroverted evidence of intentional murder.
Morgain what are you thoughts on Caysey's consciousness of guilt? Especially her stashing the car next to a dumpster. And, according to the prosecution, putting the bag of garbage in her trunk to help explain the smell.
BTW: You mentioned Caysey not being "normal". Neither was Charlie Manson. But he was still guilty.
I just caught an interesting interview clip with Tim Miller of Equusearch, the search and recovery group from Texas that was one of the first to go out to Florida to search for Cayley.
He reports that within the first ten minutes of being in the Anthony home, Cindy told him that everyone was accusing her daughter and that that wasn't true and Jose Baez told him he could do anything he wanted to perform the search but he could not ask his client any questions.
Tim said that he quit the search 4 days later and that he will always regret going out to help them. He said he knew something was wrong from the very beginning, that the Anthony family did not act like any of the families he has helped who've had missing children. He believes that George and Cindy knew Caley was dead from the very beginning and that they knew Casey was involved.
He described an incident on the 4th day where he brought in a map and asked George if they had any suggestions of where to search. George called Casey into the room and handed her a pen and said, "mark the damn spot. Where do they need to go?" At that point, Casey left the room and Cindy blew up. That incident is what cased Tim to quit the search.
That is someone whose opinion I would give weight to- I wonder why he wasn't in the trial.
Last edited by KittenSparkles; 07-04-2011 at 05:57 PM..
Location: Vermont, grew up in Colorado and California
5,296 posts, read 7,236,080 times
Reputation: 9253
Quote:
Originally Posted by E E
I just caught an interesting interview clip with Tim Miller of Equusearch, the search and recovery group from Texas that was one of the first to go out to Florida to search for Cayley.
He reports that within the first ten minutes of being in the Anthony home, Cindy told him that everyone was accusing her daughter and that that wasn't true and Jose Baez told him he could do anything he wanted to perform the search but he could not ask his client any questions.
Tim said that he quit the search 4 days later and that he will always regret going out to help them. He said he knew something was wrong from the very beginning, that the Anthony family did not act like any of the families he has helped who've had missing children.
That is someone whose opinion I would give weight to- I wonder why he wasn't in the trial.
Interesting, thanks.
Not sure if this has been posted yet, if so I apologize.
RAW VIDEO: Casey Gets Angry During Prosecutor Closing Argument - Video - WFTV Orlando (http://www.wftv.com/video/28442059/index.html - broken link)
You are applying logic to Casey which is not necessarily logical to her. I don't believe she really thinks through most of her actions. How many other lies did she tell to the boyfriend, about the family, etc., etc., BEFORE Caylee disappeared? Those just haven't been splashed all across the TV.
I guess what I'm objecting to is that there have been so many stories put out there about what Casey WANTED in her life. I'm not convinced that any of us really know what she wanted, that she WANTED to be rid of Caylee. If she didn't love that little girl, she couldn't have hidden her lack of feeling from all those people who spent a lot of time with her when Caylee was with her. If Caylee was so annoying to her, she couldn't have hidden that from her "boyfriends" when Caylee was sleeping over with her.
You are actually putting the burden of proof on the defense, and that's one of the reasons you're having trouble understanding why a jury might not find her guilty of murder. Remember, it is a requirement that the State prove their charges, beyond and to the exclusion of every reasonable doubt. I don't think the state met that burden. Accidental death is a very scenario. We do not have any uncontroverted evidence that the little girl died from suffocation.
Casey used logic very well to construct intricate lies that would benefit Casey. Yes, Casey lied well before she murdered Caylee and Casey learned that these lies worked for her. Perhaps Casey believed she could also lie her way out of a murder!
There is still doubt about what those computer searches really meant. Was she planning on killing Caylee or her parents?
I keep thinking of her telling her girlfriend that soon they would be moving into George and Cindy's house.
And then I think of the total hatred she showed for her parents whenever they were on the stand.....especially when they broke down and cried, the look of contempt and disgust on her face. She just really seems to hate her parents.
I think she could have been contemplating killing her parents. Chloroforming them and then breaking their necks, rupturing their spleens, etc., then claiming there was a home invasion.
I wouldn't put it past her. Then she would have had everything.....their house, their money and total freedom to do whatever she wanted.
I hadn't thought of that one. But it could very well have been, then when she made some of it, she tried it out on the one dog and since it didn't kill her and just made it sleepy it was a good idea to go try on Caylee
No, she isn't. In fact there are wrongful convictions in this country, and those people were prosecuted by attorneys. Does this woman have any degrees in psychology and has she written any scholarly articles, subjected to peer review, about how a "guilty" person behaves? Obviously a prosecutor would have a strong bias. The defense expert had no bias. The verdict in this case doesn't benefit or negatively affect the expert witness in any way.
It is called "experience."
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.
interesting concept
