"G (Guilty)" vs "NG (Not Guilty)" Where do you stand? #3

Status
Not open for further replies.
I don't believe there will be any problem at all with convicting her of premeditated murder, and I don't believe the Anthony's will be testifying to anything other than George being the last to see Caylee with Casey. I'm not even going to follow the trial much except occasionally when it's about chloroform and the duct tape. Hopefully it won't be messed up and have an appeal go through years from now due to some mistake or the circus antics that went on for awhile.
Not sure about the death penalty, because I think Casey's mentally ill along with being a possible sociopath, which Cindy also is said to have believed.
 
I have listened to that . Casey said she was willing to talk as long as her Lawyer was present. As soon as JB showed up he advised her not to talk. I don't blame her a bit for following the advise of her attorney. I question Nicks intentions for talking to her after she asked for her Lawyer. These are the reasons I don't trust LE. And so far they have not come up with any substantial evidence proving her guilt. NG

During the interview KC and JB talk about KC talking to the FBI and KC said, YES I said I would talk to them with my attorney present. JB then talks to KC alone and JB sudddenly states she is invoking her right not to talk. KC wanted to talk it was her unqualified atorney who was scared of the FBI. Wonder if he was afraid KC would yak yak yak, and before you know it there goes all the money JB was going to make off of a dead baby.
 
I have a question for anyone that feels that the evidence presented so far does not prove Casey guilty. Not being snarky or anything either, just trying to understand that point of view. If the evidence proves not guilty to you as far as Casey is concerned, does it point to someone else being guilty? In other words, does the evidence prove that a crime happened and that you feel it points to a specific individual? Also, could you please explain a little bit so that I can understand how you came to your conclusion? Thank you in advance.
 
Ok sorry but you are totally stating mistruths and maybe you need to go to rumor thread. - I respect your opinion when it is your opinion but can not just say nothing when you keep posting things that are blantantly not true and posting them as fact.

What mistruths are you talking about? Lets work this out so we can get to the truth. This is important to me to get to the truth for Caylee. She deserves the truth. I think Casey is NG. LE continues to try to find evidence but to no avail. I base my opinion of NG on LE's lack of evidence. Nothing really panned out for me.

The trunk
The so called lies
The Enthomology report
The body farm report
The Fbi reports
The duct tape
The Chloroform

Most of this is all up for interpretation. I think the defense will make a good arguement for their interpretation. I have a good basis for my opinion of NG. They have not in anyway proven beyond a reasonable doubt that she is.
 
notthatsmart, I would venture to assume that Nick Savage is well aware of the exclusionary rule.
 
Only to help fill my car up if I unexpectedly run out of gas. :dance:

But again, on topic, guilty. Felony murder. Going to get the DP No mitigating circs will help in this case. And the false nanny story will only speed up the hatred in the minds of the jury. No nanny. None. By the time these 12 people get sick of looking at her playing footsie with Baez under the table on top of whatever crud the defense might throw out there she will be lucky to be not dead before she is even sentenced.

Guilty. Premeditation. + Circumstances.
You know, in the beginning, I tried to give Casey every benefit of the doubt. I wrestled with this for a long time. I found it so difficult to wrap my brain around the fact that a mother could do this to her own child. But, what I truly can't get past...besides all the evidence now that ties her to the crime...is her not ever showing tears for anyone but herself. She can't even fake caring for her child.

ETA: I have never been a proponent of the DP. But in this case, if a jury of her peers finds her guilty of 1st degree murder (which I believe will happen), I will wholeheartedly support it.
 
Do you trust Casey?

Good point. We all have a choice. Trust LE who was charged with finding a little girl reported missing by her grandmother OR trust the mother of the little girl who prevaricated to cover her tail and would not cooperate.

Who has a motive for being untruthful or obstructing an investigation?

We are certainly not privy to all of the investigating LE did, so it's unfair to assume they did not adequately check out other avenues, just because all roads led back to the defendant. Certainly JG and AL were far more cooperative and forthcoming than the defendant and her family (who were using "batphones" because I guess they were worried that talking freely would get them into trouble if their lines were monitored. Only most of us wouldn't worry in the slightest if our lines were tapped if there was an evil kidnapping nanny on the loose who might call for ransom.)

I feel sorry for all of the innocent people who have had their lives disrupted and under a microscope because KC and her family are more interested in saving themselves by implicating others than in assuming responsibility for what happened to their baby. They are ancillary victims in this and it just is not fair.

I wonder if the family would be this interested in railing for the rights of the defendant if someone else were sitting in jail right now awaiting trial for killing Caylee?
 
I don't believe there will be any problem at all with convicting her of premeditated murder, and I don't believe the Anthony's will be testifying to anything other than George being the last to see Caylee with Casey. I'm not even going to follow the trial much except occasionally when it's about chloroform and the duct tape. Hopefully it won't be messed up and have an appeal go through years from now due to some mistake or the circus antics that went on for awhile.
Not sure about the death penalty, because I think Casey's mentally ill along with being a possible sociopath, which Cindy also is said to have believed.

If I remember correctly KC said she would take her own life before she would allow the state to execute her, so I say give her some rope and let her hang herself. The people in Florida wll be very happy not to be footing the bill for that baby murderer taking up space on death row.
 
What mistruths are you talking about? Lets work this out so we can get to the truth. This is important to me to get to the truth for Caylee. She deserves the truth. I think Casey is NG. LE continues to try to find evidence but to no avail. I base my opinion of NG on LE's lack of evidence. Nothing really panned out for me.

The trunk
The so called lies
The Enthomology report
The body farm report
The Fbi reports
The duct tape
The Chloroform

Most of this is all up for interpretation. I think the defense will make a good arguement for their interpretation. I have a good basis for my opinion of NG. They have not in anyway proven beyond a reasonable doubt that she is.

ITA in the sense that this is all about justice for Caylee. Not KC. KC made her own bed and slept in quite a few of them. Caylee is the victim and there is not one shred. Not one shred of evidence that proves that there ever was a nanny named Zanny. Since we already know that Casey is a proven liar. There is nothing else that points in the direction via cell phone pings, via location, via access to Caylee that would suggest that Caylee did die in the care of someone else. To wit: Caylee died in the care of KC. Casey Marie Anthony either killed her with malice or she maliciously neglected her. So if I was KC, and my daughter, say drowned in the family pool, I would be shouting from the roof tops that this was the way this sweet child's life ended. But yet, all we hear about is false nanny. False phone numbers. False addresses. Enough to make anyone sick. She is guilty. Period. The rest is just window dressing for Pier One or Ikea.
 
I have a question for anyone that feels that the evidence presented so far does not prove Casey guilty. Not being snarky or anything either, just trying to understand that point of view. If the evidence proves not guilty to you as far as Casey is concerned, does it point to someone else being guilty? In other words, does the evidence prove that a crime happened and that you feel it points to a specific individual? Also, could you please explain a little bit so that I can understand how you came to your conclusion? Thank you in advance.

I think the evidence does not prove guilty. I think it is obvious that someone else was involved. I don't know who that is. It is not the defenses job to find the perp or perps. I have some theories but truthfully I don't know what happened here. I believe LE is suffering the same dilema. After all the reports, they don't really know what happened either.

I think the evidence points to a crime happening. I do not know who that indivdual or indivuals are.

My explanation is simple. After all their efforts, there is still no proof that she did it. NG
 
What mistruths are you talking about? Lets work this out so we can get to the truth. This is important to me to get to the truth for Caylee. She deserves the truth. I think Casey is NG. LE continues to try to find evidence but to no avail. I base my opinion of NG on LE's lack of evidence. Nothing really panned out for me.

The trunk
The so called lies
The Enthomology report
The body farm report
The Fbi reports
The duct tape
The Chloroform

Most of this is all up for interpretation. I think the defense will make a good arguement for their interpretation. I have a good basis for my opinion of NG. They have not in anyway proven beyond a reasonable doubt that she is.

Okay, good job.
 
To avoid getting a time out, I am going to refrain from opining about the dangers of armchair pseudo-lawyers who make up legal rules and Constitutional protections. Instead, I am going to post only case law. But there are so many wonderful posters on WS and I would really really encourage you to take most of what people tell you "evidence" means or what "LE did bad" with a grain of salt.

Saying "the state has no evidence" is a baseless argument. THERE IS NO LEGAL DISTINCTION BETWEEN DIRECT AND CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. But don't trust me, trust the Supreme Court of the United States.

"The adequacy of circumstantial evidence also extends beyond civil cases; we have never questioned the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence in support of a criminal conviction, even though proof beyond a reasonable doubt is required. See Holland v. United States, 348 U.S. 121, 140 (1954) (observing that, in criminal cases, circumstantial evidence is “intrinsically no different from testimonial evidence”). And juries are routinely instructed that “[t]he law makes no distinction between the weight or value to be given to either direct or circumstantial evidence.” 1A K. O’Malley, J. Grenig, & W. Lee, Federal Jury Practice and Instructions, Criminal §12.04 (5th ed. 2000); see also 4 L. Sand, J. Siffert, W. Loughlin, S. Reiss, & N. Batterman, Modern Federal Jury Instructions ¶74.01 (2002) (model instruction 74—2)."

So if you'd like to instruct others to acquit any defendant who doesn't bleed all over the victim, I suggest you become a lawyer and obtain an appointment to the Supreme Court to overturn 200 years of precedent.
 
LE does not have to inform a suspect they are speaking to that they are free to go. Ohio v. Robinette, 519 U.S. 33 (1996).
 
What mistruths are you talking about? Lets work this out so we can get to the truth. This is important to me to get to the truth for Caylee. She deserves the truth. I think Casey is NG. LE continues to try to find evidence but to no avail. I base my opinion of NG on LE's lack of evidence. Nothing really panned out for me.

The trunk
The so called lies
The Enthomology report
The body farm report
The Fbi reports
The duct tape
The Chloroform

Most of this is all up for interpretation. I think the defense will make a good arguement for their interpretation. I have a good basis for my opinion of NG. They have not in anyway proven beyond a reasonable doubt that she is.

Well JB must believe LE has a boat load of evidence because he certainly built an expensive dream team to dispute all the items you listed above. The one item you left out that will stay with the jurors is Caylee is missing for 31 days, and KC is out partying and cooking dinner with stolen money from AH.
 
What mistruths are you talking about? Lets work this out so we can get to the truth. This is important to me to get to the truth for Caylee. She deserves the truth. I think Casey is NG. LE continues to try to find evidence but to no avail. I base my opinion of NG on LE's lack of evidence. Nothing really panned out for me.

The trunk
The so called lies
The Enthomology report
The body farm report
The Fbi reports
The duct tape
The Chloroform

Most of this is all up for interpretation. I think the defense will make a good arguement for their interpretation. I have a good basis for my opinion of NG. They have not in anyway proven beyond a reasonable doubt that she is.

Isn't it true that just a few weeks ago, you weren't even sure if Caylee was dead.
 
ITA in the sense that this is all about justice for Caylee. Not KC. KC made her own bed and slept in quite a few of them. Caylee is the victim and there is not one shred. Not one shred of evidence that proves that there ever was a nanny named Zanny. Since we already know that Casey is a proven liar. There is nothing else that points in the direction via cell phone pings, via location, via access to Caylee that would suggest that Caylee did die in the care of someone else. To wit: Caylee died in the care of KC. Casey Marie Anthony either killed her with malice or she maliciously neglected her. So if I was KC, and my daughter, say drowned in the family pool, I would be shouting from the roof tops that this was the way this sweet child's life ended. But yet, all we hear about is false nanny. False phone numbers. False addresses. Enough to make anyone sick. She is guilty. Period. The rest is just window dressing for Pier One or Ikea.

Well so far as I can tell, they are sticking with the Nanny story. So get ready for trial. The jury will have to hear the SA prove that these were all lies. They will also have to prove that Caylee was in those woods the whole time. Good luck with that.
 
I think the evidence does not prove guilty. I think it is obvious that someone else was involved. I don't know who that is. It is not the defenses job to find the perp or perps. I have some theories but truthfully I don't know what happened here. I believe LE is suffering the same dilema. After all the reports, they don't really know what happened either.

I think the evidence points to a crime happening. I do not know who that indivdual or indivuals are.

My explanation is simple. After all their efforts, there is still no proof that she did it. NG

What do you feel specifically points to someone else being involved? Would you agree that the list of individuals that could be involved would be rather small? As in someone that was very close to Caylee. I'm not sure how anyone not close to Caylee would be able to gain possession of the child.

Thank you for answering my original question also, I do appreaciate it.
 
Gosh highly technical there. Thanks I think the viewers got what I was saying. You can go ahead and try and make a fool out of me if you wish. I really don't take it personally. But at some point, can we get back to the evidence and the topic? I think she is NG based on these silly tactics by police. They really didn't know. They still don't know.
No...it's not "highly technical"...it's what was stated in your post. Claiming that LE was using "entrapment" and not being able to substantiate it is IMO reckless.
 
I think the evidence does not prove guilty. I think it is obvious that someone else was involved. I don't know who that is. It is not the defenses job to find the perp or perps. I have some theories but truthfully I don't know what happened here. I believe LE is suffering the same dilema. After all the reports, they don't really know what happened either.

I think the evidence points to a crime happening. I do not know who that indivdual or indivuals are.

My explanation is simple. After all their efforts, there is still no proof that she did it. NG

How about this. I may live 100 miles from the closest town. My mother and I are the only two who live in the cabin. I leave for work. I come home to a freshly baked batch of chocolate chip cookies. Should I call my uncle and thank him for the cookies?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
169
Guests online
1,533
Total visitors
1,702

Forum statistics

Threads
590,035
Messages
17,929,218
Members
228,043
Latest member
Biff
Back
Top