Page 16 of 22 FirstFirst ... 678910111213141516171819202122 LastLast
Results 376 to 400 of 548

Thread: "G (Guilty)" vs "NG (Not Guilty)" Where do you stand? #2

  1. #376
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    CT/NC
    Posts
    18,268
    It's a tough job, but I guess the knuckleheads will have to do it.

  2. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to LambChop For This Useful Post:


  3. #377
    This is why I'm on the fence. Laugh if you will, but the State will have to prove that Casey lied to police. They have not proven anything. Nothing has come under cross examination. I found the state in the interogation putting words in Casey's mouth. I understand they are allowed to do that. I think the police are even allowed to lie during an interogation. If the police would have been reasonable and let her explain herself during this interogation, then I may lean to the guilty side. That is not what they did. They did not even let her speak. I have also found in other interviews the police constantly interupt the witness while they are giving information. Perhaps if they would listen for a minute, the witness may give us the truth of what happened. These interviewers are very unprofessional. Once you have a witness in a room and you are recording, there should be no interuption. Let the witness speak. It is hard to get an opinion of G or NG under these circumstances. In court they will all have to behave and let the witness speak.

  4. #378
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,320
    Putting duct tape on a child's face is aggravated child abuse. Leaving it there until she suffocates is premeditated murder. Don't see where that is a dichotomy at all.

    LBK doesn't strike me as nearly the "unusual person" that JB has shown himself to be in court. In fact, most of KC's little "dream team" looks embarrassed when he opens his mouth or they listen to phrases in a motion he wrote.
    Last edited by JBean; 11-16-2009 at 12:44 PM. Reason: removed name
    "Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices" - Voltaire

  5. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to cecybeans For This Useful Post:


  6. #379
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    6,480
    Quote Originally Posted by notthatsmart View Post
    This is why I'm on the fence. Laugh if you will, but the State will have to prove that Casey lied to police. They have not proven anything. Nothing has come under cross examination. I found the state in the interogation putting words in Casey's mouth. I understand they are allowed to do that. I think the police are even allowed to lie during an interogation. If the police would have been reasonable and let her explain herself during this interogation, then I may lean to the guilty side. That is not what they did. They did not even let her speak. I have also found in other interviews the police constantly interupt the witness while they are giving information. Perhaps if they would listen for a minute, the witness may give us the truth of what happened. These interviewers are very unprofessional. Once you have a witness in a room and you are recording, there should be no interuption. Let the witness speak. It is hard to get an opinion of G or NG under these circumstances. In court they will all have to behave and let the witness speak.
    LE is allowed to lie, which causes many wrongful confessions -- as do third degree interrogations by LE.

    Those truths aside, Casey didn't confess to murder, and lies to LE (beyond a confession) are not inculpatory evidence.
    It's not what a man knows that makes him a fool, it's what he does know that ain't so. .... Josh Billings

  7. #380
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,320
    Quote Originally Posted by notthatsmart View Post
    This is why I'm on the fence. Laugh if you will, but the State will have to prove that Casey lied to police. They have not proven anything. Nothing has come under cross examination. I found the state in the interogation putting words in Casey's mouth. I understand they are allowed to do that. I think the police are even allowed to lie during an interogation. If the police would have been reasonable and let her explain herself during this interogation, then I may lean to the guilty side. That is not what they did. They did not even let her speak. I have also found in other interviews the police constantly interupt the witness while they are giving information. Perhaps if they would listen for a minute, the witness may give us the truth of what happened. These interviewers are very unprofessional. Once you have a witness in a room and you are recording, there should be no interuption. Let the witness speak. It is hard to get an opinion of G or NG under these circumstances. In court they will all have to behave and let the witness speak.
    We only heard the last few minutes in a conversation that lasted hours - from all of the misinformation KC gave LE when they were riding around until 2 am looking for Zanny the night before to the silly stories she spewed about her cellphone and office the next morning at Universal. They also returned to the cop shop and questioned here there. The portion we hear is at the end at Universal when the detectives realized that she was like some wind-up ADD liar and was making up stuff like some impromptu comedian. They had been hearing her talk ad nauseum and it was of no substance and they just didn't want to listen to her for another shift. I agree that more sophisticated interrogators may have gotten something out of her, but these were detectives looking for a missing child and she was leading them in circles and NOTHING she had told them so far checked out in the least, including the fictitious names. Frankly I was surprised they let her drone on as long as they did. Someone that glibly uncooperative is useless - sifting through "mistruths" and "half-truths" is a waste of time and money when you tell LE you are looking for an abducted child. If you are to be taken seriously SOMETHING you tell them needs to be true. Nothing KC said or did was even near the truth - fictitious nannies, fictitious friends, fictitious jobs - it was all useless and the more they sat listening to her the more useless it became in terms of locating Caylee, which was their prime objective.
    "Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices" - Voltaire

  8. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to cecybeans For This Useful Post:


  9. #381
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    In the Woods In Georgia
    Posts
    5,518
    Quote Originally Posted by notthatsmart View Post
    This is why I'm on the fence. Laugh if you will, but the State will have to prove that Casey lied to police. They have not proven anything. Nothing has come under cross examination. I found the state in the interogation putting words in Casey's mouth. I understand they are allowed to do that. I think the police are even allowed to lie during an interogation. If the police would have been reasonable and let her explain herself during this interogation, then I may lean to the guilty side. That is not what they did. They did not even let her speak. I have also found in other interviews the police constantly interupt the witness while they are giving information. Perhaps if they would listen for a minute, the witness may give us the truth of what happened. These interviewers are very unprofessional. Once you have a witness in a room and you are recording, there should be no interuption. Let the witness speak. It is hard to get an opinion of G or NG under these circumstances. In court they will all have to behave and let the witness speak.
    But Casey herself said to the detectives that she lied...does her own words not prove that they have proven she lied? When they asked her why they were at Universal she flat told them because she lied...
    Do they really have to prove she lied after she herself admitted to it? Followed by "I will lie, and steal?"
    Sorry, I disagree!
    Justice For Caylee Marie

  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to mydailyopinions For This Useful Post:


  11. #382
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    6,480
    Quote Originally Posted by cecybeans View Post
    Putting duct tape on a child's face is aggravated child abuse. Leaving it there until she suffocates is premeditated murder. Don't see where that is a dichotomy at all.

    LBK doesn't strike me as nearly the "unusual person"that JB has shown himself to be in court. In fact, most of KC's little "dream team" looks embarrassed when he opens his mouth or they listen to phrases in a motion he wrote.
    Nothing proves the strips of duct tape caused Caylee's death. Moreover, nothing connects Casey to the roll of duct tape from which those strips were torn.

    (Speculation is not evidence, nor are jurors permitted to speculate.)
    Last edited by JBean; 11-16-2009 at 12:44 PM. Reason: removed name from quoted post
    It's not what a man knows that makes him a fool, it's what he does know that ain't so. .... Josh Billings

  12. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Wudge For This Useful Post:


  13. #383
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    CT/NC
    Posts
    18,268
    KC gave a written statement which contained many lies the obvious of which is that she left her child with the nanny between 9 and 1, then went to work, just like any normal day. KC did not have a job. She did not leave the child at Sawgrass as no one lived in that apartment. She gave a statement to the effect that Nanny had lived in an apartment which is a home for the elderly across from RM apartment. The list of lies in her statement are endless. Facts prove she lied. If someone choses to believe what she stated then I guess they can assume she was not lying but it does not mean it is so.

  14. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to LambChop For This Useful Post:


  15. #384
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    In the Woods In Georgia
    Posts
    5,518
    Quote Originally Posted by Wudge View Post
    Nothing proves the strips of duct tape caused Caylee's death. Moreover, nothing connects Casey to the roll of duct tape from which those strips were torn.

    (Speculation is not evidence, nor are jurors permitted to speculate.)
    Hang on tight Wudge, I have a feeling we haven't seen everything yet.
    Justice For Caylee Marie

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to mydailyopinions For This Useful Post:


  17. #385
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    6,480
    Quote Originally Posted by mydailyopinions View Post
    Hang on tight Wudge, I have a feeling we haven't seen everything yet.
    I agree. Like the recent revelations about the syringe and the Gatorade bottle that works for the defense, I expect to hear of further evidence that will benefit the defense too.
    It's not what a man knows that makes him a fool, it's what he does know that ain't so. .... Josh Billings

  18. #386
    Anything can happen... it's still a long way off. For all we know, even as we sit here typing, JB may be on the phone with a pediatrician who will swear on the stand that duct tape across the face promotes good health and well-being in young children. At this point little would surprise me.

  19. The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Daylight/1257 For This Useful Post:


  20. #387
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Volunteer Country
    Posts
    1,223
    Quote Originally Posted by notthatsmart View Post
    This is why I'm on the fence. Laugh if you will, but the State will have to prove that Casey lied to police. They have not proven anything. Nothing has come under cross examination. I found the state in the interogation putting words in Casey's mouth. I understand they are allowed to do that. I think the police are even allowed to lie during an interogation. If the police would have been reasonable and let her explain herself during this interogation, then I may lean to the guilty side. That is not what they did. They did not even let her speak. I have also found in other interviews the police constantly interupt the witness while they are giving information. Perhaps if they would listen for a minute, the witness may give us the truth of what happened. These interviewers are very unprofessional. Once you have a witness in a room and you are recording, there should be no interuption. Let the witness speak. It is hard to get an opinion of G or NG under these circumstances. In court they will all have to behave and let the witness speak.

    By the time this interview had taken place, she had already given a full statement about her daughter's whereabouts. This is after LE had check out her information and they ALL turned out to be lies.

    When she was arrested the last time, LE wanted to sit down with her again and let her give a statement. She invoked her rights via JB and has been silent ever since. We know what she told LE the first time was not the truth. We have read her written statements. We have heard her voice say words which we know are not true. Now she sits silently while a handful of folks defend her disgraceful display of defiance toward the people who were trying to help find her little girl.
    “The fact that Casey Anthony was the last person to have custody of her daughter, failed to report her missing (or dead) for 31 days, consistently lied once confronted, and the child was found dead and hidden, and she failed to tell what actually happened despite repeated opportunities to do so to her family, friends or law enforcement, (even when faced with the death penalty) was sufficient to find her guilty -- not necessarily of premeditated murder, but certainly all lesser charges. The duct tape and other forensic evidence provided additional, but not necessary, evidence. “
    Quote from: Judge H. Lee Sarokin
    Retired in 1996 after 17 years on the federal bench

  21. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to coco puff For This Useful Post:


  22. #388
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    In the Woods In Georgia
    Posts
    5,518
    Quote Originally Posted by Wudge View Post
    I agree. Like the recent revelations about the syringe and the Gatorade bottle that works for the defense, I expect to hear of further evidence that will benefit the defense too.
    I don't look much into the syringe and the Gatorade bottle myself. Honestly, I think the defense needs all they can get to throw back on the state. If Casey didn't do this, then there is no doubt in my mind Baez would already have a composite sketch of Zanny out like months ago.
    I'll be thinking of you Wudge when they hand down her death sentence..Honestly, you try so hard...
    Justice For Caylee Marie

  23. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to mydailyopinions For This Useful Post:


  24. #389
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    CT/NC
    Posts
    18,268
    When the Sawgrass Apartment abduction story did not work out KC changes the story to JBP where ZFG and her sister take off with Caylee after KC is held down. But ZFG does not take KC's phone, in the middle of a kidnapping KC still has her phone. So was the phone more important than her child. 911 takes 2 seconds to dial and the police would have been there within a minute and looking immediately for her child. So her stories are nothing but lies to cover up the truth and that is what the jury will see. All the evidence that will be presented together and it will not be speculation because someone killed the child, a person with the opportunity, motive and access. The person would be Caylee's mother. WS'ers have looked at all the evidence presented so far and there is nothing that shows clearly another person had access to this child without Mom knowing about it. Mom has the answers but it's not in her best interest to speak according to her attorney. That statement from her own attorney speaks volumes.

  25. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to LambChop For This Useful Post:


  26. #390
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,320
    Quote Originally Posted by Wudge View Post
    Nothing proves the strips of duct tape caused Caylee's death. Moreover, nothing connects Casey to the roll of duct tape from which those strips were torn.

    (Speculation is not evidence, nor are jurors permitted to speculate.)
    We've been here and done this - ground already covered. Begging the question is not a viable answer, imo.
    "Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices" - Voltaire

  27. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to cecybeans For This Useful Post:


  28. #391
    Phumi's Avatar
    Phumi is offline Founding Member of AFKBPOFPOPL and Mulch Princess
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    At the Rink
    Posts
    4,711
    Quote Originally Posted by cecybeans View Post
    we've been here and done this - ground already covered. Begging the question is not a viable answer, imo.
    Thank you, cecybeans!!!

  29. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Phumi For This Useful Post:


  30. #392
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    762
    Quote Originally Posted by Horace Finklestein View Post
    You are right. The problem some people have is slavishness to the letter of the law. I personally do not care if the right thing (justice for caylee) is achieved in the technical 'wrong' way. The legal system is not fool proof and the point of it all is for justice, not just following procedure for heaven's sake.

    The system is here for everyone, not just legal professionals who are often out of touch with the spirit with which our system was founded. Kinda sad, but I trust the jury to do the right thing.
    Before we had a constitution, we had the Salem Witch Trials where 19 men and women were convicted up performing witchcraft. They were taken to the gallows and hung. As recently as the late 1800's people in small towns in the midwest and west were hung on little or no evidence. Fortunately, our society has progressed, but we learned from the past and although technicality is part of that progression, it has become increasingly necessary.
    No our legal system is far from fool proof in my opinion, but the fundamentals are the same, and fundamentally as far as I know, the accused is still presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. Here in the court of public opinion we have the luxury of not needing proof to speculate, and we all do that one way or another. How we interpret evidence in this court of public opinion is up to each of us an individuals. That being said my opinion remains neither guilty nor not guilty, I'm undecided.

  31. The Following User Says Thank You to thedeviledadvocate For This Useful Post:


  32. #393
    Quote Originally Posted by Wudge View Post
    LE is allowed to lie, which causes many wrongful confessions -- as do third degree interrogations by LE.

    Those truths aside, Casey didn't confess to murder, and lies to LE (beyond a confession) are not inculpatory evidence.
    I beg to differ with the part I bolded.

    "ANYTHING you say can and will be used against you."


    Four of the counts against Casey are lying to a LE officer.

  33. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Jolynna For This Useful Post:


  34. #394
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Over Yonder
    Posts
    1,219
    Quote Originally Posted by Wudge View Post
    No. It's fact.

    In Florida, the death penalty is not available for felony murder.
    I believe this is correct (although not with 100% surety), the DP is not available in Florida for felony murder due to Edmund v. Florida of 1982. Before this 1982 case Florida did impose the DP for felony murder. However I believe there was a conviction in 1975 for felony murder in Florida that was later upheld on appeal in the 90's (maybe 1998) in Florida. I just don't remember the case wish I had more info on that. The DP is available as a punishment for other states however.

    Tison v. Arizona 1987 upholds that Felony Murder can be punishable by the DP and the US Supreme Court has stated that felony murder does not violate a persons 8th amendment rights. Other states site this case to up hold the DP in these types of cases. So if anyone has evidence (ie. links) either way could you please link it. Would like to know exactly how Florida treats Felony Murder and the punishment options for it in Florida.

    However KC can receive LWOP for a Felony Murder conviction in Florida. Aggravated Child Abuse in my opinion will be the felony that the state will claim Casey committed that led to Caylee's death for a felony murder conviction. Knight (brought to us by Lin) shows that this charge (felony murder) does not have to be listed in the charges. If they (the state) go the Felony Murder route. The state can ask that the jury to be instructed on felony murder with out actually charging her with it.

    Personally I think this felony murder question is going to be a moot point. I don't see that state going that route personally. Given that we are still a ways away from trial I think there is going to be more and more evidence released in the case from the Sunshine laws in Florida (not due to "leaking' info on part of the state). I think once we see all the evidence in this case, is when the hammer is going to come down on Casey.

    There is not one shred of evidence pointing to anyone other then Casey. Any kind of accident theory can also be thrown out the window. The defense and Casey have already thrown that kind of defense away anyways. The circumstantial evidence in this case right now is overwhelming. Many have been convicted on far less then what we have seen already in this case.

    In my opinion the best outcome in this case for Casey is going to be LWOP. Keep in mind we the public have yet to see all the evidence by the state. Yes Casey is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. However people are allowed to form there own opinions based on the evidence at hand. Thus far, the over all consensus seems to be Casey is guilty. That's not to say that "not guilty" is not a valid argument. I think it should be noted though that many people after reviewing some of the highlights of this case have come to a conclusion of guilty at first glance pretty quickly.

    I have yet to see one valid argument about Casey being innocent or proof of such innocence. Every argument for Casey is based on skewed interpretation and looking for loop holes by the defense. In my mind the defense tossed out the one thing that could have saved their client early and that was the accident defense. That ship however has long since sailed. They said she was innocent in a court of law. Where is the proof to back such a statement (we'll see in February)? It's one thing to claim your client is not guilty, it's a whole other ball game to claim they are innocent.

    Also the evidence after the fact does not point to an accident. Duct tape, driving around with body, lying about the childs where abouts, Casey's over all behavior (parties, boys, financial crime spree) all point towards this not being a accident. At no time did Casey ever show the emotion or the normal behavior of someone in grief for an accident to have occurred. Yes people do grieve differently, but when a mothers child dies they don't act the way Casey did, and it doesn't take a doctorate in psychology for someone to recognize that.

    People see "31 days" and other highlights such as Casey's lies and her behavior and it's hard for any lay person to not look at that and the overwhelming circumstantial evidence and go "Yep she's guilty". Also juries do and are allowed to use their own judgment, and reasoning of the evidence presented to form their verdict (If not verdicts would be handed out by computers using a set mathematical formula. Evidence goes into box = get verdict based on 1's and 0's). I think this overwhelming consensus also shows that most potential jury members are going to hand down a guilty verdict. The DP also ups the ante as well by providing a more conservative "death penalty qualified" jury.

    Given what we the public have seen and what we are going to see as time ticks closer to trial I would say it's a pretty safe bet Casey is going to be found guilty. I think the only possible variance for the out come of this case is going to be in the sentencing phase. LWOP or DP.

    As an aside, I also think many of Casey's possible appeal claims are being dashed by the work of the Judge. Strickland is making sure many of the more common appellate issues are being taken care of. I'm sure later after her conviction some lawyer or activist group somewhere will want a slice of the money making pie/ publicity and come up with some obscure appellate reason later that will be shot down.

  35. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to marspiter For This Useful Post:


  36. #395
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    584
    Quote Originally Posted by Wudge View Post
    I agree. Like the recent revelations about the syringe and the Gatorade bottle that works for the defense, I expect to hear of further evidence that will benefit the defense too.
    Wudge, there was lots of garbage in that wooded area that might not be tied to KC. That fact does not work for either side; it just is.
    Last edited by Rlaub44; 11-16-2009 at 01:29 PM. Reason: punctuation edit

  37. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Rlaub44 For This Useful Post:


  38. #396
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Over Yonder
    Posts
    1,219
    Quote Originally Posted by Wudge View Post
    No. It's fact.

    In Florida, the death penalty is not available for felony murder.
    No this is not fact, this is incorrect. My previous statement about Edmund v. Florida is true, but Florida still maintains the DP for Felony murder according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics and these links based on that info.

    http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/state_by_state

    http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/crim...-death-penalty

  39. The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to marspiter For This Useful Post:


  40. #397
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,320
    Quote Originally Posted by marspiter View Post
    No this is not fact, this is incorrect. My previous statement about Edmund v. Florida is true, but Florida still maintains the DP for Felony murder according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics and these links based on that info.

    http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/state_by_state

    http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/crim...-death-penalty
    Particularly for circumstances involving a victim under the age of 12, IIRC.
    "Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices" - Voltaire

  41. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to cecybeans For This Useful Post:


  42. #398
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    6,480
    Quote Originally Posted by marspiter View Post

    SPIN

    There is not one shred of evidence pointing to anyone other then Casey. Any kind of accident theory can also be thrown out the window. The defense and Casey have already thrown that kind of defense away anyways. The circumstantial evidence in this case right now is overwhelming. Many have been convicted on far less then what we have seen already in this case.

    SNIP

    I have yet to see one valid argument about Casey being innocent or proof of such innocence.

    SNIP

    Also the evidence after the fact does not point to an accident. Duct tape, driving around with body, lying about the childs where abouts, Casey's over all behavior (parties, boys, financial crime spree) all point towards this not being a accident. At no time did Casey ever show the emotion or the normal behavior of someone in grief for an accident to have occurred. Yes people do grieve differently, but when a mothers child dies they don't act the way Casey did, and it doesn't take a doctorate in psychology for someone to recognize that.

    People see "31 days" and other highlights such as Casey's lies and her behavior and it's hard for any lay person to not look at that and the overwhelming circumstantial evidence and go "Yep she's guilty". Also juries do and are allowed to use their own judgment, and reasoning of the evidence presented to form their verdict (If not verdicts would be handed out by computers using a set mathematical formula. Evidence goes into box = get verdict based on 1's and 0's). I think this overwhelming consensus also shows that most potential jury members are going to hand down a guilty verdict. The DP also ups the ante as well by providing a more conservative "death penalty qualified" jury.
    Our system of jurisprudence does not require evidence that points to anyone else. Our system of jurisprudence requires prosecutors to present sufficient evidence to prove a specific criminal charge. Because no direct evidence exists in this case, sufficient evidence to prove any of the charges must necessarily come in the form of highly reliable inculpatory evidence.

    As regards a valid argument for innocence, Casey is presumed innocent. And based on what we know, there is insufficient inculpatory evidence to prove any of the State's top three charges. Insufficient evidence is certainly a valid argument to support a continuation of the presumption of innocence that Casey is afforded by law.

    In reference to the '31 days', that is but still more behavior-based evidence, not inculpatory evidence. In and of itself, behavior-based evidence (and any other corroborative evidence) would be insufficient evidence for a conviction.
    It's not what a man knows that makes him a fool, it's what he does know that ain't so. .... Josh Billings

  43. The Following User Says Thank You to Wudge For This Useful Post:


  44. #399
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    6,480
    Quote Originally Posted by Rlaub44 View Post
    Wudge, there was lots of garbage in that wooded area that might not be tied to KC. That fact does not work for either side; it just is.
    No. Prosecutors don't define what is and is not evidence. The defense is permitted to present a case along with supporting evidence.
    It's not what a man knows that makes him a fool, it's what he does know that ain't so. .... Josh Billings

  45. #400
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    CT/NC
    Posts
    18,268
    Correct, one piece of evidence in and of itself, would not be sufficient evidence for a conviction. I think it is the other truck load of manure that tells you there is indeed a horse in the pasture. JMO

  46. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to LambChop For This Useful Post:


Page 16 of 22 FirstFirst ... 678910111213141516171819202122 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. "G (Guilty)" vs "NG (Not Guilty)" Where do you stand?
    By Mermaid in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 974
    Last Post: 07-14-2009, 08:34 PM
  2. "Chaotic Patriot" Guilty of Murdering Two Police Officers
    By CatMama3 in forum Crimes in the News
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-22-2007, 03:45 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-21-2006, 06:12 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •