2011.05.10 - Sidebar Thread (Jury Selection Day Two)

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
uklaw said:
I don't know if your being sarcastic there.

But regardless of what she did, it does society no good to drop our moral standards to those which we perceive to be the Defendant's. Especially prior to conviction.
Click to expand...

She is charged and under arrest for Capital Murder. She is being held, without bail, by the State of Florida. She is not allowed to hang around in the court room if she feels like it. She, like every other person in custody, has to abide by the rules of the jail and court.
 
Mama-cita said:
I disagree. The presumption of innocence does not mean that the rules and order with which a defendant is treated should not be implemented. Yes in the eyes of the law in this country a defendant is innocent until proven guilty but within the courts and the jail systems, steps and order has to be taken to protect the court as well as the officers and corrections personnel that interact with them. People are presumed innocent, but they are not always innocent. Many a defendant have grabbed for a deputies gun or made some other stupid attempt that could get someone hurt or worse, killed. They may see the freedom of the court (i.e. no shackles and bars) as a last ditch attempt to do something desperate. That is why the prisoners have to be treated in that manner. For the protection of corrections personnel. Casey doesn't get a free pass because she's a "sweet little innocent thing" she should have to follow the SAME rules that any other inmate would have to follow. IMO.
Click to expand...

TBH, I would said the same regardless of her being a "sweet little [innocent] thing".

In any event, she poses no risk to corrections personnel, public or the court and doesn't have a history of acting up, misbehaving in custody, attemptiing to escape, etc from what I can understand. So there is no need to move her straight into custody.

What you state about the desperate attempt for freedom might apply when she is convicted (which - in passing - casts some light on why Deputies often are so quick to place in restraints a Defendant once convicted). Also, I have seen cases when Judges have been quite happy and instructed LE not to treat with respect and allow these courtesies to Defendants as long as they don't play up.
 
ZsaZsa said:
Wow, WFTV has an interview with one of the Jurors who was kicked off today.
She says the great majority there do not want to be associated with this case because they know she is guilty of killing her kid and she couldn't get a fair shot from them...
http://www.wftv.com/video/27842588/index.html
Click to expand...
The most telling is at the end when she said "not one person thought or expressed that ICA didn't do it or is innocent". Very telling.
 
Why don't they just ask people who wants to serve on the jury as long as they have no hardships? I would think they could get enough people that wants to serve since they know its a high profile case. Then weed them out for intelligence and sanity. One women came across a bit slow and they still wanted her to return. If they cannot answer simple questions as they are asking now, how are they going to understand the forensic evidence?
 
uklaw said:
I don't know if your being sarcastic there.

But regardless of what she did, it does society no good to drop our moral standards to those which we perceive to be the Defendant's. Especially prior to conviction.
Click to expand...

There's no dropping of moral standards to have a guard escort her out of court in a timely manner. If you have watched this case for the last 3 years you will appreciate that ICA is not a respecter of rules. On this occasion she should be made to observe them.
 
4realtho said:
I don’t know about anyone else but I have to walk away from my computer at times because it's so hard for me not to call some of these players out of their name. Well, I finally figured out a solution. Tomorrow when I feel the need to name call, which has been quite often lately, I will unplug my keyboard and just start typing away, I mean really let go. Then once it's out of my system, I will plug back in and post responsibly. BTH, this behavior is so unlike me.
Click to expand...

:silly:

Never thought of that one before! :D
 
alwaysonmymind said:
She is charged and under arrest for Capital Murder. She is being held, without bail, by the State of Florida. She is not allowed to hang around in the court room if she feels like it. She, like every other person in custody, has to abide by the rules of the jail and court.
Click to expand...

But I am not sure there is any rule that a Defendant be removed immediately and without the slightest delay upon closing of the Court.

Also, from other cases I have seen, the Defendants are usually allowed to stay behind momentarily to speak to their DT.
 
Paintr said:
Defense will pounce on this video to prove KC can't get a fair trial. :banghead:

Or to argue the choice the Judge made of where to try to pick the jury.
Click to expand...

The Judge hasn't said the jurors need to nothing about what has happened to date, he is looking for reasonable people who are willing to/can put their beliefs aside and listen only to the evidence. And I believe there are 20 people who can do that/or have no knowledge of this case.

Remember we are so immersed in this case there is no way we would float if you tossed us in a river.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong but ICA does stand for INMATE Casey Anthony, doesn't it? ;)
 
uklaw said:
In any event, she poses no risk to corrections personnel, public or the court and doesn't have a history of acting up, misbehaving in custody, attemptiing to escape, etc from what I can understand. So there is no need to move her straight into custody.
Click to expand...

Respectfully snipped.

As history has shown, defendants can be well behaved for years. Give them an inch they will try to escape, harm, or murder to get free. Some still try even when under heavy watch. Not saying KC would, just saying that in the US all persons in custody are treated the same way, for many good reasons that history has shown.
 
Paintr said:
Defense will pounce on this video to prove KC can't get a fair trial. :banghead:

Or to argue the choice the Judge made of where to try to pick the jury.
Click to expand...

What you said Paintr , this makes me a little nervous. How many times could she have said EVERYBODY thinks she killed her baby? The DT just might eat this up.

The One time I was excused or not used for a jury it had to do with a gang member. We were told we STILL could not talk about it. We could not go home and tell anyone that we were considered to be on the jury. Don't know of the rules for this but makes me weary.
 
allycat1208 said:
Why don't they just ask people who wants to serve on the jury as long as they have no hardships? I would think they could get enough people that wants to serve since they know its a high profile case. Then weed them out for intelligence and sanity. One women came across a bit slow and they still wanted her to return. If they cannot answer simple questions as they are asking now, how are they going to understand the forensic evidence?
Click to expand...

I think both the Defense and State are allowed to hear the reasons and object, etc.

You also risk getting the "wrong" sort of jurors (i.e. wannabe authors).
 
ZsaZsa said:
Well she was nothing if not frank about her reasons.
This is going to be a big problem for the DT- it's not media fault if they have read about her case and decided, as a lot of us have, that she killed Caylee.
Seems their media blitz last week did nothing for them.
The words Lipstick and pig come to mind..
Click to expand...

After listening to this interview regarding how the potential jurors had already decided she was guilty, my only thought is: "Take a bow, Cindy"...

I seriously doubt the majority would have followed this case so intently - had it not been for CA and her bizarre antics. I know I wouldn't have.... jmo
 
RR0004 said:
Are ya serious? Wow! How did they find this out? They should have known better. Where does that leave jury selection?
Click to expand...


snipped from :
http://www.wesh.com/casey-anthony-ex...97/detail.html

Perry then released the entire group. He later said that one of the potential jurors was also listed as a witness in the case.

After their exit, Perry admitted that the process was running behind schedule.

--------------

What is bothering me is this :

If you are on the Witness List for the ICA Trial and you get summons for Jury Duty in Pinellas County where the Jury is being picked for the Trial, wouldn't you go to the Jury Clerk and say something -- explain the situation -- I mean, she had to KNOW that the potential jurors were being selected there to go to Orlando for ICA's trial.
 
the ceo seemed quite agitated with her board of directors today.
forcefully expressing her displeasure to her new #1(cm)
also told in no uncertain language, for jb to report to her new office suite
after court, that he had some "splaining" to do.
 
uklaw said:
TBH, I would said the same regardless of her being a "sweet little [innocent] thing".

In any event, she poses no risk to corrections personnel, public or the court and doesn't have a history of acting up, misbehaving in custody, attemptiing to escape, etc from what I can understand. So there is no need to move her straight into custody.

What you state about the desperate attempt for freedom might apply when she is convicted (which - in passing - casts some light on why Deputies often are so quick to place in restraints a Defendant once convicted). Also, I have seen cases when Judges have been quite happy and instructed LE not to treat with respect and allow these courtesies to Defendants as long as they don't play up.
Click to expand...

I don't think deputies should make assumptions about inmates either way. I think they should follow the rules for everyone so no one gets hurt. One can't assume that just because someone has no history of violent behavior that one will never act violent. When people do something crazy, very rarely do you hear people say "Yeah he was a stark raving lunatic, I am not surprised he went to the top of the bell tower and started shooting student nurses." No, usually it's the opposite "Wow, that person seemed so normal I am shocked." The rules of returning the inmates to custody/frisking them etc. are in place to protect the men and women who are brave enough to be in this line of work. KC should not be exempt from them. :twocents:
 
logicalgirl said:
The Judge hasn't said the jurors need to nothing about what has happened to date, he is looking for reasonable people who are willing to/can put their beliefs aside and listen only to the evidence. And I believe there are 20 people who can do that/or have no knowledge of this case.

Remember we are so immersed in this case there is no way we would float if you tossed us in a river.
Click to expand...

Problem being if the Jurors know too much about the case that can be almost impossible. Remember not only must justice be done it must be seen to be done.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 167 more.
Total: 4,570 (members: 168, guests: 4,402)

Online statistics

Members online
168
Guests online
4,402
Total visitors
4,570
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,488
Messages
17,969,630
Members
228,787
Latest member
Acalvert
Back
Top