Prosecution giving choice of Murder or Manslaughter!

New Posts

PattyCake

PattyCake

Gypsy By Heart
Joined
Aug 29, 2008
Messages
1,933
Reaction score
12
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/10/16/caylee.mom.indicted.ap/index.html
"Rose said the state has done "a very smart thing" in charging Anthony with murder and manslaughter, because it gives the jury a choice.

"You give the jury a place to run," Rose said."


Okay, I did not know this. Prosecution is going to give the choice of convicting her on murder or manslaughter? So does this mean no DP option? :furious:
I think this is terrible personally.
 
I think it's smart just b/c if they don't prove murder 100%, they give the jury the option to still convict. If manslaughter was not offered and they didn't prove the murder case to the jury, she walks b/c they couldn't try her again on a lesser charge.
 
I just assumed with these charges, she was going to be in jail for life WHEN convicted. But manslaughter? She can strut herself out of jail with very little time. I thought they had a premeditated case?
 
I hope they do, but I think it is common to include lesser charges. Anybody know if it's common?
 
Even if she had only been charged with murder the jury could reduced the charge down to manslaughter.
 
I guess if they had the body, it would help. Someone needs to find the body.
 
If convicted of manslaughter would that mean she would be in the general prison population? IMO that would be a death sentence anyway...
 
It is common to have lesser included offenses. It would be unwise not to, given this is a case with no body and not the typical case. The state can't be blinded by wanting the top charge so badly that they set up a situation where she could "get off." That said, people put too much emphasis on how there is "only" circumstantial evidence in the case. There's a lot, it's good evidence, and people get convicted for murder based on circumstantial evidence all the time.
 
PattyCake said:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/10/16/caylee.mom.indicted.ap/index.html
"Rose said the state has done "a very smart thing" in charging Anthony with murder and manslaughter, because it gives the jury a choice.

"You give the jury a place to run," Rose said."


Okay, I did not know this. Prosecution is going to give the choice of convicting her on murder or manslaughter? So does this mean no DP option? :furious:
I think this is terrible personally.
Click to expand...

PattyCake,

Don't fret:smoochiesmilie:

However this plays out, justice for Caylee will happen. It does not remove the DP option to answer your question. It just gives a jury which might not be convinced of the murder evidence (not saying that would happen)
a place to hang their hat other than "Acquittal."
Hope that answers your concerns.:blowkiss:
 
:)
MiraclesHappen said:
PattyCake,

Don't fret:smoochiesmilie:

However this plays out, justice for Caylee will happen. It does not remove the DP option to answer your question. It just gives a jury which might not be convinced of the murder evidence (not saying that would happen)
a place to hang their hat other than "Acquittal."
Hope that answers your concerns.:blowkiss:
Click to expand...

:) Thank you, that say's it clear. None of us want manslaughter. :blowkiss:
 
Yeah Patty don't worry - they always do this. That way if there is one hold-out juror who doesn't believe it was premeditated murder, the entire jury can decide manslaughter (30 years probably in this case) is better than her walking.

And in FL if you charge murder 1, even if the jury doesn't believe it was premeditated, they can convict under felony murder - which also carries the death penalty. There, they would have to find that she was guilty of the aggrevated child abuse, which led to caylees death, and that would = felony murder. This is a smart prosecution team
 
LeLe1953 said:
:)

:) Thank you, that say's it clear. None of us want manslaughter. :blowkiss:
Click to expand...

:highfive:


It's really a strategic move...a judgment call as to whether or not, in any particular case, the prosecution seeks to include lesser crimes as options. Sometimes they try to swing a case with an "all or nothing approach." Sometimes, they approach with more guarded stategy to get some sort of pronouncement that this defendant is in some way responsible for this death and should be punished accordingly.
It turns into a chess game. :deal:
Defense can request the jury be instructed on lesser included offenses even when those are not officially charged. :gavel: But then again, so can the other side.

There will be arguments about the jury instructions from both sides anyway...they will be submitted to the Court as "Requests for Jury Instructions." That is standard stuff..Baez can get it out of a form book.
BUT, he still has to know which ones to pick so as to further his own client's cause.:):blowkiss: So yes, it an area "ripe for screw up."
 
Hmm... Im not sure what to think of this, Im not real literate on formal charges and all the info that goes with them. Can someone tell me, in laymen terms what this means and give some examples or scenarios of what could play out with it going in this direction? TIA.
 
I really think the pros. is just covering their bases. This way they are practically assured a guilty verdict. I'm convinced they'll get 1st degree though.
 
lawlady84 said:
Yeah Patty don't worry - they always do this. That way if there is one hold-out juror who doesn't believe it was premeditated murder, the entire jury can decide manslaughter (30 years probably in this case) is better than her walking.

And in FL if you charge murder 1, even if the jury doesn't believe it was premeditated, they can convict under felony murder - which also carries the death penalty. There, they would have to find that she was guilty of the aggrevated child abuse, which led to caylees death, and that would = felony murder. This is a smart prosecution team
Click to expand...

Thank you very much for that clarification. It's really nice to have your intelligence here. I don't know a whole lot about law, so your posts are very helpful.
 
Misfit76 said:
Hmm... Im not sure what to think of this, Im not real literate on formal charges and all the info that goes with them. Can someone tell me, in laymen terms what this means and give some examples or scenarios of what could play out with it going in this direction? TIA.
Click to expand...

Ok. If the jury is not convinced that there is premeditation, (Casey planned the death and did it) and not convinced that Caylee died during a session of aggravated child abuse (such as being left in the trunk so mommy could party).
Well then the jury has other avenues to find Casey is reponsible for causing the death of Caylee and should be so punished. ......finding that Casey was such a crappy mother that the crappiness rises to criminal conduct or criminal negligence which falls below the threshold needed to show aggravated child abuse.:blowkiss:

Either way gets Casey in prison. The conviction for crappiness does not carry the DP , or life.
 
As said before, they are doing it to ensure they get a guilty charge. It may be hard to prove Murder and they don't want to end up having her found not guilty and then they end up finding Caylees body and uh-oh double jeopardy.
 
FSU_Girl said:
Even if she had only been charged with murder the jury could reduced the charge down to manslaughter.
Click to expand...

I'm not certain but I don't believe that's true. The jury can only choose from the options they are given, they can't come up with one on their own.
 
Suspicious Mind answered the why. At first, I thought they were only going after a Murder charge, and thought to myself -well, let's see them prove murder. They covered their bases.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 67 more.
Total: 1,116 (members: 68, guests: 1,048)

Online statistics

Members online
68
Guests online
1,048
Total visitors
1,116
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,784
Messages
17,958,852
Members
228,606
Latest member
wdavewong
Back
Top