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.
This is just lazy. I post a list of reasons why I think Casey is a bad daughter and cindy is a good mom, and this is the best response? And all the stuff about Cindy's supposed ulterior motives for the visit request is pure speculation. Around these parts we require some type of source, evidence or factual claim for your opinion to be substantiated. Otherwise its just a waste of internet space.
This is just lazy. I post a list of reasons why I think Casey is a bad daughter and cindy is a good mom, and this is the best response? And all the stuff about Cindy's supposed ulterior motives for the visit request is pure speculation. Around these parts we require some type of source, evidence or factual claim for your opinion to be substantiated. Otherwise its just a waste of internet space.
"Around these parts"...........LMAO.
I don't respond well to heavy handed demands......attempted intimidation doesn't work on me.
I watched this case from the beginning so I was seeing the same thing as the jurors. I know there are a million and one theories as to what happened but here is what I think happened.
BTW, there have been some very insightful interviews by Casey's friends, ex-fiance and the lady that lived with them for a bit while they were "searching" for Kaylee.
I think the family is EXTREMELY dysfunctional. Cindy especially has a role in her daughters psychology and what that is... I'm not sure. Casey shows some developmental issues but that is beside the point. I think she loved her daughter... not the way a normal person does but like a "pet"... just because you see a video of her playing with her daughter means NOTHING. It's like playing with your dog in the backyard, it shows no insight into the true psychology of this woman. If she is a sociopath and I STRONGLY believe she is.... sociopaths function in society all the time. Many hold down jobs and have families all the while burying bodies in their basements.
It has been said that Casey and her mother had a fight the night before Kaylee went missing. I think that gave Casey some sort of motive or at least was the start of her snapping. Remember, there is something horribly wrong with the relationship between Cindy and Casey. Yes, Casey liked to party like any 20 something but I don't think she killed Kaylee because she wanted to party. She could have easily left her daughter with the parents. But she didn't... why?
Casey is terribly broken. She makes up an entire life of "wonderful" people that don't even exist. It's a world she creates to feel accepted or to make her reality a better one. She is a LIAR and a BIG one. This we know. She is a high school drop out, no goals, no job, told people she was working on getting two degrees, said she worked at Universal Studios all the way to the point of bringing the cops to the building, she stole checks and bought clothes, booze, etc... blah blah blah. It's all about HER. I'm not painting a good picture here am I?
None of this makes one a killer but when you put the WHOLE thing together.. it just starts to look bad bad bad. I don't think George had anything to do with her death. I do however think the parents suspected Casey did something to her daughter VERY early on. Why didn't George call the police when he smelled the decomp? Plenty of reasons. There are all sorts of psychological reasons for this. Sometimes we don't want to believe something especially when it's our own daughter. A sort of denial, or neah, that couldn't be! Think about finding something that suggests your spouse is cheating and you pass it off as something else. Believe me, I did it!!
Did George have an affair? Maybe, but who cares.
I think Casey killed her daughter as a way to "hurt" her parents. Do I think it was premeditated? Yes. I think she was "thinking" about it, hence the Cloroform and neck breaking searches. And her mom covering for her and lying on the stand about that? WTF?
The accidental drowning argument is a stretch. People don't cover up accidents to make them look like murders. People have however covered up murders to look like accidents. Casey killed her daughter. She covered up that child's face with THREE pieces of duct tape. No.. they didn't WRAP around the head, they didn't need to.... you only need a few pieces on the nose and mouth to kill someone. I think either she did it at home which is most likely since items from Kaylee's bed were found with her bones. Mom threw her in the trunk and wasn't quite sure where to put her for awhile until she tossed her in the woods near the home.
There isn't a mother on the planet that doesn't report her child missing for 31 days, enters a hot body contest and gets a "good life" tattoo when her daughter is "missing" BS BS BS!!!!!
This woman is dangerous and has an innate ability to compartmentalize things, live in an alternate reality, folks, she is not NORMAL. If I were her, I would look over my shoulder and either A. someone is going to off her. B. She will self destruct or C. She will repeat a similar pattern all over again. Mark my words.
As for the jury, they went off of evidence and I guess in their minds, lying party girl with a smelly trunk wasn't enough. They did their job but it makes me sick that they let a killer go... and I think most if not all know this. I don't know how they will sleep at night.
What scares me is that Casey will probably get pregnant again. Lord help us all.
I have a feeling that if they saw a video of the crime they would have still come up with some excuse they thought "reasonable."
Right, like well, duh, uh, the father COULD have molested her and THAT'S why she did what she did. Millions of people have been molested and did not kill their children but Casey might have been. The poor thing didn't know what she was doing at the time and she partied afterwards because, um, duh, the poor thing had to do SOMETHING to comfort herself.
This needs to be repeated about a million times. EVERYONE I've talked to thinks the skull was found with the duct tape on it. It was not.
It should also be repeated a million times that the only possible way that the skull was still intact is IF the duck tape had held it together. Did Roy Kronk go in there and GLUE the cranium back on after the body decomposed?
[snip]There isn't a mother on the planet that doesn't report her child missing for 31 days, enters a hot body contest and gets a "good life" tattoo when her daughter is "missing" BS BS BS!!!!!
[snip].
All it takes is one grief counselor to say that Casey's bizarre and guilty behavior Might fit a pattern of grief that, what, one-in-a quatrillion mothers might display and all the common sense and life experience of 12 jurors go out the window. What a shame.
Quote: Originally Posted by Magritte25
This needs to be repeated about a million times. EVERYONE I've talked to thinks the skull was found with the duct tape on it. It was not.
For some reason, many folks think it is a fact that there was not duct tape on the skull. They are mistaken.
There is a crime scene photo, admitted into evidence and shown to the jury, of a skull immersed in debris (they wouldn't go as far as to say 'embedded into the ground') with 3 pieces of duct tape on it. Apparently, the jury didn't get the significance of this, just as much of the public doesn't. But the Steven Hanson (crime scene supervisor) testimony covers it.
Did Roy Kronk pick up the skull and/or kick it around and/or 'stick his meter reader pole into its eye socket' ?(sorry, everyone, but that's what he said). Please. His own son impeached him. He's unreliable.
Anyway, there was duct tape on the skull, and all the cotton fibers in it had disintegrated from the elements as had any fingerprints and DNA.
People keep talking about the "jury" almost as if they picture it as a single "person" or "single entity" in which there was no possibility or opportunity for disagreement or discussion.
12- count them- 12 separate individuals saw the trial in person and agreed quickly- not even a hung jury- not a single "hold out". Even the alternate who has spoken agreed he would have come to the same verdict- so make that 13 unrelated INDIVIDUALS who EACH reached the same conclusion after attending the same event.
It would appear that the actual evidence, as opposed to Nancy Grace style rantings, did not meet the burden of proof.
If they were "bullied" they could/can report that to the Judge.
If they changed their minds, that means that a reasonable doubt was established.
Actually there were 6 jurors who wanted the verdict of manslaughter and two wanted Murder 1. Now how did this turn to 12 not guiltys? Someone must have put some assinine reasoning on the table and the other weak fighters did not want to disagree. Some would rather switch than fight.
Number 3 juror gave us a taste of what the grounds were . No one knows how she died..was jurors # 3 reasoning of reasonabe doubt.... the fact is Caylee is dead and was thrown out down the street from Casey's home like a bag of garbage and everything Caylee was wrapped in came from Casey's home. Plus Casey hid the fact she was missing to delay the fact of the reality Caylee was dead.
Do we need a ring side seat to the murder of Caylee when we have evidence like this? NO!!!!!!!!!
You know, the jury doesn't need to take notes. There is a court reporter present who is recording every word that's being said. If the jury had any questions about testimony, all they had to do was ask the court to have that VERBATIM testimony read back to them. (Much better than sloppy notes take by a person trying to listen and write at the same time) Court reporters sometimes spend hours reading back testimony to juries when requested to do so. The whole "note taking" issue is really crap, IMO. It is far more important that the jury LISTEN to the testimony as it is given, observe the demeanor of the witnesses, the body language, etc., than it is to take notes. People make mistakes when they're trying to listen and take notes, or they miss part of the testimony when they're busy taking notes. As I said, there is a court reporter present at EVERY felony trial and that person is trained to report EVERY WORD SAID in the proceeding, and they can read back to the jury any and all testimony that the jury is unsure about.
Are you suggesting that we REQUIRE juries to deliberate for a minimum period of time on all cases?
Who said they "ignored the obvious coverup by the family"? A coverup by the family does not PROVE that one of the members murdered the child.
I've come to the conclusion that the criminal justice system is rather complex and that most people really don't understand how it works and the principles which underlie it. Guess they just don't teach these things very well in high schools or colleges unless you major in criminology or go to law school.
sounds like a good idea for juries in a murder trial to have a standard amt of deliberation time set----
while covering up a death may or may not be a crime(ie--abstruction of justice)--it should be factored in a decision--imo--it was not
as to the justice system---there have been known to be serious mistakes made in trials(ie oj and this one) so it certainly needs to be scrutinized carefully and maybe rethink a person only being tried for murder one time
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.
