1086 users online (233 members and 853 guests)  


The Killing Season - Websleuths

Websleuths News


Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    On Cloud 9
    Posts
    54

    If the Jury Believes George Anthony Was NOT Involved....

    Everyone knows what Baez said in opening statements about this being a horrible accident and George was involved and Casey saw George holding her dead body and took her from him (personally believe this is bs). If the jury does NOT believe George was involved and diregards what Baez said, will they disregard ALL of what he said about that or will they remember that he admitted Caylee died on June 16, 2008 and Casey both saw and held her dead body? Sorry for putting it that way but wasn't sure how to word it.
    This Is Just My Opinion


    We worry about what a child will become tomorrow, yet we forget that he is someone today. ~Stacia Tauscher

    Every child comes with the message that God is not yet discouraged of man. ~Rabindranath Tagore

    Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none. ~William Shakespeare

    Justice For Haleigh!!!

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by BittysMomma View Post
    Everyone knows what Baez said in opening statements about this being a horrible accident and George was involved and Casey saw George holding her dead body and took her from him (personally believe this is bs). If the jury does NOT believe George was involved and diregards what Baez said, will they disregard ALL of what he said about that or will they remember that he admitted Caylee died on June 16, 2008 and Casey both saw and held her dead body? Sorry for putting it that way but wasn't sure how to word it.
    I think they will hold Baez to his opening statement which includes his admission that Caylee drowned on June 16, 2008. They will weigh his opening statement against the evidence offered by the prosecution and countered by the defense. Remember, HHJP stated it is up to the jury to decide if they will give each piece of evidence great weight, little weight or no weight at all. HTH!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    2,903
    I also think the jury will weigh the evidence and will see that baez did NOT bring forth any evidence or truth. NOONE covers up an accident to make it look like murder. NOONE. Dr. G summed it up best..In 100 percent of accidental drownings 911 is called. That means to me...not 99% but 100%. Dr. G would know.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    On Cloud 9
    Posts
    54
    I guess the way I should have asked this is, if the jury believes that he was not involved because there was no evidence to support it, considering that he said she died on June 16th, it was an accident, George was the one that found her, Casey saw and held her dead body, pretty much all in the same breath, do you guys think the jury will take that whole statement with a grain of salt or does the part about her seeing and holding her stick out like a sore thumb. To me, what sticks out the most in that statement was that Casey saw and held her, not the date or that George was involved (though I never believed he was involved). I know this may sound like a dumb question but after the day of opening statements, no one seemed to make a big deal out of that and that's one of the things that I remember most in the trial and thought all of the media would be talking about it during the whole trial. I know there were tons that went on during this trial but that was and is one of the main things that stuck out to me. Maybe it's just my inexperience with trying to work these types of things out in my mind.
    This Is Just My Opinion


    We worry about what a child will become tomorrow, yet we forget that he is someone today. ~Stacia Tauscher

    Every child comes with the message that God is not yet discouraged of man. ~Rabindranath Tagore

    Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none. ~William Shakespeare

    Justice For Haleigh!!!

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    645
    Baez didn't introduce 1 legit piece of evidence that supported the accidental drowning story or George being involved. Since opening statements are not evidence, there is none. On top of that, his client has lied about absolutely everything. In my opinion the jury will not believe the accidental drowning story.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    645
    Quote Originally Posted by BittysMomma View Post
    I guess the way I should have asked this is, if the jury believes that he was not involved because there was no evidence to support it, considering that he said she died on June 16th, it was an accident, George was the one that found her, Casey saw and held her dead body, pretty much all in the same breath, do you guys think the jury will take that whole statement with a grain of salt or does the part about her seeing and holding her stick out like a sore thumb. To me, what sticks out the most in that statement was that Casey saw and held her, not the date or that George was involved (though I never believed he was involved). I know this may sound like a dumb question but after the day of opening statements, no one seemed to make a big deal out of that and that's one of the things that I remember most in the trial and thought all of the media would be talking about it during the whole trial. I know there were tons that went on during this trial but that was and is one of the main things that stuck out to me. Maybe it's just my inexperience with trying to work these types of things out in my mind.
    I think I understand what you are asking is that if the jury does not believe George was involved, will they discount the entire story? My opinion is yes.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by BittysMomma View Post
    I guess the way I should have asked this is, if the jury believes that he was not involved because there was no evidence to support it, considering that he said she died on June 16th, it was an accident, George was the one that found her, Casey saw and held her dead body, pretty much all in the same breath, do you guys think the jury will take that whole statement with a grain of salt or does the part about her seeing and holding her stick out like a sore thumb. To me, what sticks out the most in that statement was that Casey saw and held her, not the date or that George was involved (though I never believed he was involved). I know this may sound like a dumb question but after the day of opening statements, no one seemed to make a big deal out of that and that's one of the things that I remember most in the trial and thought all of the media would be talking about it during the whole trial. I know there were tons that went on during this trial but that was and is one of the main things that stuck out to me. Maybe it's just my inexperience with trying to work these types of things out in my mind.
    They will that whole statement with a grain of salt.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    N.E. Ohio
    Posts
    591
    Quote Originally Posted by GourmetSoy View Post
    Baez didn't introduce 1 legit piece of evidence that supported the accidental drowning story or George being involved. Since opening statements are not evidence, there is none. On top of that, his client has lied about absolutely everything. In my opinion the jury will not believe the accidental drowning story.
    And not even an innuendo that Roy Kronk found, hid and eventually put the body in those woods. He showed even less evidence about that than he did with George.

    I will never, ever understand JB's OS. It made less sense at the end of the trial than it did at the beginning. It's like he wrote it on the car on the way to the courthouse.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    5,151
    The defense has nothing to support their opening statement. Especially the abuse by George and Lee. I mean he didn't even ask them about that.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    19,250
    Well, if they find her guilty the part you mention might be the one thing that they accept from the OS. Casey would have had to see and hold Caylee's dead body to triple bag her and to throw her in the woods.

    I don't know... I can only speak for myself but even though I reject the defense OS in its entirety I do consider JB admitting that Caylee died on the 16th in Casey's presence as a sign that it probably is true.

    Another thing I consider as a possible grain of truth in the OS is JB slipping that it could have been early afternoon and changing it to early morning hours. It sounds like he couldn't keep the real story and the fake story apart for a second. So, did she die early afternoon?


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    San Antonio, TX
    Posts
    6,178
    Quote Originally Posted by WillenFan21 View Post
    The defense has nothing to support their opening statement. Especially the abuse by George and Lee. I mean he didn't even ask them about that.
    I think this is important, and was noticed by the jury. He didn't ask them anything that might point in that direction. Nothing.

    OT- thank you for posting the info about the iPhone app for watching the trial! I got to watch the trial last week while I was at work.
    I started out with nothing, and I still have most of it left.


  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    West Coast of Fla.
    Posts
    271
    I think that out of the whole OS that JB offered, there were 2 statements of fact: there was no nanny, and that ICA lies. I know they lost me with the time (it was early morning, maybe late morning, actually it was early morning), he couldn't even set the scene with a specific time. JMO

    Just to add a bit about ICA'S reactions: When LDB was offering SA's OS right near the end she said something to the effect of...did Caylee have to die like this (or something like that) and ICA nodded as if to say yes. During the entire OS for the SA ICA shook her head no except this one time. It's in the video here, sorry I don't know how to post a link.





















    sa
    Last edited by donada; 07-02-2011 at 07:50 PM. Reason: add last paragraph

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    11,311
    It wasn't my idea to make an sensational statement in the Defense's Opening about a p3nis. I would think as a juror I'd now resent JB trying to shock jurors without later explaining and providing evidence to support that awful vision. They accused GA of everything.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    On Cloud 9
    Posts
    54
    I too believe that George was NOT involved and I do NOT believe she was molested. A few of you touched on what I was trying to get at lol. Sorry, did not word it very well in either post I made. Here's my reaction and I hope it helps. When Baez said all the stuff about George being involved, they molested her, she died on the 16th and Casey saw and held her. My very first reaction was OMG he just said admitted Casey had contact with Caylee after she died. Basically, even though I heard the rest, I didn't. Does that make sense lol? Ok, I'm sure I reacted that way because I already knew quite a bit about the case and had never heard an admission like that come out. I realize opening statements aren't considered evidence but lets face it, the jury heard that. So what I was wondering is how are the jurors going to take that statement after hearing/seeing all the evidence and they're in deliberations....weather it be outloud or in their own minds. I mean, even if they aren't supposed to use that because it's not evidence, it has to be in their mind, it would be in mine. LOL maybe I would never make a good juror.
    This Is Just My Opinion


    We worry about what a child will become tomorrow, yet we forget that he is someone today. ~Stacia Tauscher

    Every child comes with the message that God is not yet discouraged of man. ~Rabindranath Tagore

    Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none. ~William Shakespeare

    Justice For Haleigh!!!

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    N.E. Ohio
    Posts
    591
    Maybe I missed it, but did they ever say in court that George was also tested for paternity and he could not be the father either? I only remember when them talking about Lee and the FBI lady said Lee could not be the father. At the time I thought if I was on the jury I would think it was odd they didn't say anything about George, especially since he is the main one JB accused of actual molestation. I hope the jury isn't thinking something is being kept from them.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. What if George really was involved?
    By Etilema in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 91
    Last Post: 07-06-2011, 11:16 PM
  2. If Jury Believes ICA Killed Caylee, but not by Duct Tape Can they Convict?
    By Never4GetCaylee in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 07-05-2011, 07:57 PM
  3. George Anthony will testify against Casey next week before the grand jury
    By Truth Seeker in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 251
    Last Post: 10-13-2008, 12:58 AM
  4. A psychic involved in the Anthony case faces a criminal investigation
    By Truth Seeker in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 122
    Last Post: 09-15-2008, 01:08 AM