How the defense team used social media to their advantage

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
But believe it based on WHAT? If Casey told them a story..and they were sticking to that...why did attacks "beef up" when people appeared vulnerable to that idea?

I thought the drowning story was Casey's "truth" not a theory. Did they tell the jury these were only their "theories?" When was that said?
 
This makes me sick. And this should NOT be allowed - he should not have used this method.

When I heard him describe in closing how Casey came to make the chloroform searches regarding Ricardo's post on facebook - I knew it was WORD FOR WORD suggestions we made HERE on the very topic!

I also was CONVINCED Timer55 fromthe prosecution and the idea that Caylee was startign to talk came from us to. It was word for word.
 
Mendara said:
This makes me sick. And this should NOT be allowed - he should not have used this method.

When I heard him describe in closing how Casey came to make the chloroform searches regarding Ricardo's post on facebook - I knew it was WORD FOR WORD suggestions we made HERE on the very topic!

I also was CONVINCED Timer55 fromthe prosecution and the idea that Caylee was startign to talk came from us to. It was word for word.
Click to expand...

I have never read timer55 on here. Can you tell me where I could read it? Just a general area, year, etc. tia
 
I'm not surprised by this and MarthaM stated attorney have done this in the past in different ways.

There was another forum I used to post on about this case and on that forum people did have drowning theories because Cindy's statement about the ladder being up. I post on that forum two years ago and there were drowning theories.
 
Mendara said:
This makes me sick. And this should NOT be allowed - he should not have used this method.

When I heard him describe in closing how Casey came to make the chloroform searches regarding Ricardo's post on facebook - I knew it was WORD FOR WORD suggestions we made HERE on the very topic!

I also was CONVINCED Timer55 fromthe prosecution and the idea that Caylee was startign to talk came from us to. It was word for word.
Click to expand...

Wow. Do you have the link to the post(s) here about the chloroform searches that are like what Baez said? I'd love to review that.
 
stmarysmead said:
For instance, when the blogs started attacking George Anthony, Singer and her team took notice and encouraged the defense to beef up their attacks on the defendant's father.

"We had to know how much to blame George," she said.

This sounds like they used this research to decide who to vilify. If they were telling the truth...or even Casey's version of the truth...there would be no difference in "how much to blame George."

The truth is the truth. This was a sham defense. They perpetrated a fraud IMO.
Click to expand...


:goodpost::clap::clap::clap::clap:

ITA They did perpetrate a fraud and did so knowingly,this just proves it IMO.
 
stmarysmead said:
But believe it based on WHAT? If Casey told them a story..and they were sticking to that...why did attacks "beef up" when people appeared vulnerable to that idea?

I thought the drowning story was Casey's "truth" not a theory. Did they tell the jury these were only their "theories?" When was that said?
Click to expand...

Cheney mason told the judge that the theory was JUST THAT A THEORY and they were not claiming it to be from Casey.

This was when the judge questioned the drowning and asked if casey was to testify - the prosecution stood up and said they had evidence to impeach Casey should she take the stand about her computer and phone activity on the morning of the 16th.

Cheney then says they didn't give the jury a specific time for the drowning THEORY and were not going to. That the prosecution had the burden of proving it false.

Basically while the jury was out of the room, the defense admitted their theory was made up to cast reasonable doubt and was not actual fact.

SAD FACT that the jury never heard and what eventually lead to travesty of the aquittal.

DISGUSTING. GROSS and UNREAL. MO
 
Mendara said:
Cheney mason told the judge that the theory was JUST THAT A THEORY and they were not claiming it to be from Casey.

This was when the judge questioned the drowning and asked if casey was tot estify - the prosecution stood up and said they had evidence to impeach Casey should she take the stand about her computer and phone activity on the morning of the 16th.

Cheney then says they didn't give the jury a specific time for the drowning THEORY and were not going to. That the prosecution had the burden of proving it false.

Basically while the jury was out of the room, the defense admitted their theory was made up to cast reasonable doubt and was not actual fact.

SAD FACT that the jury never heard and what eventually lead to travesty of the aquittal.

DISGUSTING. GROSS and UNREAL. MO
Click to expand...

Which reminds me, does anyone know if the sidebar transcripts have been requested by the media yet? In particular, those that have to do with the defense theory and Casey's suspected incompetence?
 
Every online group should bring a class action suit against ICA and the DT for taking others ideas and using them. I know this is ridiculous but so is the DT and this verdict!
 
Did the jury consultants begin monitoring sites long before the trial and continue during the trial? If they started months before they didn't get much negativity about George here. I think myself and only a few others said critical things about George's behavior over the 3 years, and only a few of us defended Cindy. His behavior still bothers me, but it probably means nothing in this case, and it wasn't enough to find Casey innocent and blame him. Most people thought Casey a psychopath and the rest were thinking the drugging in the trunk to party scenario. Almost everyone believes he had an affair just because some woman said they did. How they figured out this jury is crazy. I think it must be the location they were picked from, and their economic status. How the majority of people in the U.S. didn't think anything bad about George and yet this small group went along with it is mind boggling to me.
 
Etilema said:
Which reminds me, does anyone know if the sidebar transcripts have been requested by the media yet? In particular, those that have to do with the defense theory and Casey's suspected incompetence?
Click to expand...

Jeff A said in an interview when asked about the competency testing, that those were sealed and couldn't be released. Now I don't know if he meant never ever could they be released or if he meant not now but at a later date. So the sidebar containing any of that info may not be released either. jmo
 
cluciano63 said:
IMO, trials are almost always about who puts on a better case, not just about the "truth". Both sides leave out what won't help their case. I'd be willing to bet I've never seen a trial where someone did not lie on the stand, just not as obviously and provable as Cindy did.
Click to expand...

Very true, and it's not just the defense who plays games and pulls sneaky tricks, sometimes the prosecutors do it as well. There are a lot of crooked prosecutors who will do anything in order to win the case, or just to make it hard for the defense. Just like in the beginning of the trial when the SA's refused to give Baez a list of who they intended to call as a witness the next day so he could have their files ready. Of course that is not a requirement, but why couldn't it be a courtesy? It's like, "we aren't going to do anything we don't have to do as long as it makes your job easier."

You're also right in that there is nearly always someone who lies on the stand, it happens a lot. Even the paid experts will lie, or at least gear their testimony to favor whichever side is paying them. It seems that more and more, trials are not about getting to the truth, it's just more competition between lawyers.

I do like the statement another poster said the other day, and I agree with it. I would rather see one guilty person go free than one innocent person be executed for a crime they didn't commit. Casey will not know real freedom, for a very long time, and Caylee is in a place where no one can ever hurt her again.
 
Saffron said:
During the prosecution's closing argument, I wondered if JA had gotten the idea about Caylee beginning to talk from a thread on this forum. The moment he referred to Caylee forming sentences and that it wouldn't be long before she would expose Casey's lies, I thought about that (insightful) thread on here about Caylee "tattling".
Click to expand...

JA credited LDB with coming up with that. It was on one of the interviews after the verdict. He said she brought it up to JA not long before closing arguments.
 
Not sure where to post this question, but I am wondering if yesterday when the investigators were doing their presser, did they say or indicate if anyone was going to coninue to investigate this case? Is it over even though so many people think she was murdered and not drowned. Or even if it was an accident it wasn't drowning, etc.

I would like to know that someone is still trying to get to the truth. jmo
 
It was obvious they were reading this board. If we posted something one day, we heard them mention it the next day. For instance, when the jurors sent a note to Judge Perry saying they didn't see the heart sticker and asked if they could see it, many here thought the jurors were illegally discussing the case. Don't you know, the defense team didn't worry about that until the next day or so when Cheney Mason finally mentioned it to Judge Perry. One would think an "experienced" attorney like Mason would have thought of questioning their integrity as soon as it happened.

Sure the defense knew questions about George were rampant, and also knew some people early in the case had questioned if Caylee died in the pool. Some people still believe it. I never did.

Of course they wanted to know what we were saying. I guarantee, they still do.
 
cuppy199 said:
This is exactly why I have never posted a theory or suggested anything that the DT could use. Its pretty sad when they have to look to others to find a defense or understand the case:twocents:
Click to expand...

Yup - I couldn't agree with you more. In fact, I have literally sat on my "posting" hands more times than I can count for this very reason.

:wave:

DT
 
mck16 said:
Not sure where to post this question, but I am wondering if yesterday when the investigators were doing their presser, did they say or indicate if anyone was going to coninue to investigate this case? Is it over even though so many people think she was murdered and not drowned. Or even if it was an accident it wasn't drowning, etc.

I would like to know that someone is still trying to get to the truth. jmo
Click to expand...

I believe they said the case is closed. They know who did it. She got away with murder.

There could be some peripheral investigations though.
 
lowens1975 said:
JA credited LDB with coming up with that. It was on one of the interviews after the verdict. He said she brought it up to JA not long before closing arguments.
Click to expand...

I had heard that on HLN early in the trial or before. I wondered then if the SA would use that. It is the only thing that makes sense to me that would cause ICA to murder her. jmo
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 218 more.
Total: 4,379 (members: 219, guests: 4,160)

Online statistics

Members online
219
Guests online
4,160
Total visitors
4,379
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,822
Messages
17,959,619
Members
228,621
Latest member
MaryEllen77
Back
Top