2011.07.11 Greta Van Sustern interview with Jury Foreperson

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Mysterious said:
I actually think the cartoon is what started ICA in thinking that she could hloroform Caylee and go out and party. IMO, ICA did a little research, found out how to make chloroform, went out and bought acetone, possibly experimented on the dogs, and then started on Caylee.
Click to expand...

Except CA's story about the dogs was part of her lie .She never researched chlorophyl,so I don't believe the dogs were sleeping more.

Pure speculation on my part,but I believe she intended to knock out GA and/or CA with the chloroform,then kill them .
 
TotallyObsessed said:
He also said it was reasonable to think that the boyfriend (Richardo) posted the chloroform picture and the next day Casey visited myspace, then googled chloroform one time to see what it was.

That's it. Simple.
Click to expand...

I know that it wasn't presented in evidence during the trial, however, IIRC, I thought that the "Win Her Over With Chloroform" picture wasn't uploaded to Ricardo's MySpace page until towards the end of April, 2008 (unless I'm dreaming, I seem to remember this from Ricardo's computer forensics?) Anyone else remember this? If that's the case, he uploaded that picture one month after all those March, 2008 computer searches.
 
erinleigh said:
And this is why I'm so glad I did not watch. Did greta try to school him in any way that some of their conclusions did not go with the evidence or for that matter the DTs story?
Click to expand...

It appears to me Greta is just trying to get the story and playing softball with the guy to keep him talking and maybe get other jurors on the show in the future.

Good, Bad, I don't know.
 
tfrohning said:
oh! for three years I wonder what Lee was talking about...plus on the stand another secret he was asked about and he didn't answer:waitasec:

I think your right and it will come out....No one talk about Lee writing a book but I got Hinky feeling that he will...maybe not right away but he will.

Just like Scott Petereson sister did!
Click to expand...

Uhhh.... Did anyone but me have their hinky meter go off the chart when they heard just how many dang pets died in that hpuse in such a short span of time, coupled by the testimony that CA said her yorkies had been "really tired lately" ??? Uhh, hello, can you say sociopath???:waitasec:
 
Poodleluver said:
I always wondered why she said "her dad" must have hit a squirrel when it was the car SHE drove! I'm sure Amy knew KC always drove the car. Why would George be driving it? Just something I always thought about. Maybe she was already setting George up (?) Even way back when I had a feeling she would try to pin it on him.
Click to expand...
I've said from day 1 that Casey was out to get her Dad, she played CA against GA the whole time which is why she was like she was...CA would always tell GA she'd take care of it....yea, she did. And, if you remember when CA was on the stand she was asked who drove the car, she said Casey & George. She acted like it was their car to share during her testimony which I found strange because I'd never heard it referenced like that prior to that day.
 
ahoyhoy said:
I did not see ANY of the juror interviews (read transcripts), but the details y'all are discussing w/ #11 makes him sound like he ALSO ignored all the evidence---trying to 'fit' a theory with how 'nice' MCA 'looks'.

They couldn't take it, couldn't believe she would---so they ignored everything that made them 'uncomfortable' about her, and looked at the big, bad MEN. UGH!!!!

Also, I can't believe that NOT ONE was affected when George broke down for Caylee? They thought that was fake?
OF COURSE George was rude w/ Baez---wouldn't you be if accused of all that? The jury could not empathize at all with George having to deny being a molester in court & on t.v?

I am more & more convinced every day that they looked at her, decided she 'couldn't' have done it, and grasped at ANYTHING that would end the trial a.s.a.p. JMO, of course.

I wonder if HHJP will ever address this trial in an interview? After he retires, I hope---but I really need to hear what His Honor thought of this jury.
Click to expand...

I think that judge Perry was disgusted with the verdict, and I noticed that "madam clerk´s" voice started shaking when she read the NOT GUILTY verdicts on the first three counts.
I would like to hear judge Perry´s thoughts too. Not anytime soon, I guess, if ever.
 
JSV said:
I remember Lee asking casey in a video jail visit ... Is this like the last time .... Has she had a baby before that she murdered and threw away like trash that no one ever knew about .Sounds like it . MOO
Click to expand...

That's an interesting thought. Only her medical records would show a previous pregnancy so we'll never know. But she didn't finish high school either. I wonder if that was a secret, or THE secret between the two of them. I had forgotten about that question, what a weird family.

Or maybe she threatended Cindy with taking Caylee away before, and she disappeared with her for a few days previously to punish Cindy, and he's asking, is this like the last time, meaning are you just doing this to punish mom again?

So many possibilities and we'll never know...
 
I heard one of the THs extolling the beauty of our jury system and explaining how, if one juror was unclear on some part of the testimony, the others would remember it, and how they all worked to put the pieces of the case together...Apparently, that didn't work for these (fill in the blank) jurors, who didn't understand the state didn't have to supply a motive or a method, that opening statements aren't evidence, that when a witness commits perjury on the stand it's important to pay attention to the impeachment that follows, and so forth. I wish someone would get these (fill in the blank) people together in a room and make them acknowledge their repeated failures to follow instructions, to review testimony in question, to apply critical thinking, and to put forth more than the absolute minimum amount of effort required to fulfill their duty as jurors in this case. I have no respect whatsoever for what passed for deliberation in this case, nor for the jurors themselves.
 
Its almost as if the jury only heard the Defense OS and the defense side of the case... then made there decision based on that information. Seems to me they completely disregarded the prosecutions ENTIRE case!! Wow.. think of all the time, effort, and man power just wasted.

How could a group of people be so taken in by that smarmy Baez and Mason.. they make my skin crawl. All this time during the trial I was trying to think what the jury was thinking of them.. well.. now I know.
 
kaki said:
I've been trying to not watch any tv coverage of the trial, the jurors, the talking heads..etc... Unfortunately last night I watched some of this interview...it was a BIG mistake...I'm STILL so angry!!!

You would thing George was on trial instead of the murderess ... they scrutinized everything george said.. but looked at NO evidence (of the piles and mountains ).. that pointed to the murderess Casey.

I didn't watch the whole interview.. i couldn't bear it. I believe someone posted that he thought Casey was a "nice person", "well spoken".. where did he get THAT from.. her jailhouse videos.. "just get me Tony's number".. you all are a huge waste... I can't "SHWALLOW"..

Its all so unbelieivable.. I feel like the world is upside down... and Greta just sits there and nods her head.. not even asking anything substantial.... seems like he pretty much ran the interview.. just like he probably railroaded the rest of the jury!!!

Ok.. lesson learned.. those jurors are NEVER going to say anything intelligent or make me think they did their jobs.. the more they talk.. the more ridiculous their thought process sounds...OMG... NO MORE CASEY ANTHONY TV COVERAGE FOR ME!!!!
Click to expand...

^^^BBM^^^
And the jurors are apparently never going to be asked the questions we want to hear....unless LDB and JA get to do the asking.
 
goldenlover said:
She would not have gotten a mis-trial. Deliberations can be simply a vote. There is no set time for a jury to deliberate. There is no rule that they must go over any evidence again. 12 educated, intelligent people came to the same unanimous verdict..that is all they needed to do. That is due process. They can disregard any part of any evidence they deem not credible. It is up to them what they choose to consider and what they do not. The defense rebutted much of the states evidence using experts from the FBI crime lab and the sherrifs office experts. evidence the state chose not to present becaue it did not fit their "theory" of the events....does that not tell you anything about the states evidence?
Click to expand...

What tells me something is that almost all of the defense's rebuttal witnesses ended up confirming the findings of the prosecution's forensic witnesses. At most, they would throw out a bizarre, ridiculous possibility like "the body could have been there for as little as two weeks even though roots were growing through the bones" or "the duct tape might have been placed on the skull after the body decomposed." But, every time, they would end up admitting that the prosecution's witness's testimony was valid. I don't think the jury understood what was being said -- not just the scientific stuff but also things like how Cindy was proven to be at work at the time she testified to be doing "chlorophyll" searches (which her computer somehow changed to "how to make chloroform.")

The prosecution had a theory of events based on Casey's behavior + forensic evidence. The defense had a "story" that had no basis in any evidence (they offered none) and were unable to successfully disprove any of the prosecution's evidence.
 
SongBird said:
I still believe going against the grain...shocking outcome was viewed but this jury as the best way to be more wanted by the media for interviews...if the verdict was guilty...no one would really care what these 12 jurors would have to say because that was the verdict the majority expected!!!! I refuse to watch...after I heard juror number six got an agent the day after the verdict!!!! to me that is telling (all about $$$$$$$) JMHO
Click to expand...

I could not agree more.
 
Dr.Fessel said:
And how many times did Linda say "Did you type how to make chloroform into the google search bar?"

Reasonable juror 11, Casey see's a cartoon about Chloroform and the next day she googles "HOW TO MAKE CHLOROFORM"

Where is the reasonable in that?
Click to expand...

Am I wrong, or weren´t those Chloroform searches deleted from the Anthony computer as the only searches deleted? And then retrieved by the computer experts.
If I am not wrong about this (I think to remember it from the trial, please correct me if I am wrong), it is a very compelling fact. Why delete just those searches?
 
SATA said:
Am I wrong, or weren´t those Chloroform searches deleted from the Anthony computer as the only searches deleted? And then retrieved by the computer experts.
If I am not wrong about this (I think to remember it from the trial, please correct me if I am wrong), it is a very compelling fact. Why delete just those searches?
Click to expand...

You are correct. I guess Mr. Foreman forgot to right that down in his 400 pages
 
MrsThreadgoode said:
I know that it wasn't presented in evidence during the trial, however, IIRC, I thought that the "Win Her Over With Chloroform" picture wasn't uploaded to Ricardo's MySpace page until towards the end of April, 2008 (unless I'm dreaming, I seem to remember this from Ricardo's computer forensics?) Anyone else remember this? If that's the case, he uploaded that picture one month after all those March, 2008 computer searches.
Click to expand...

That is correct - it was AFTER the date of the chloroform search on the Anthony computer. I believe this was presented in evidence.
 
dog.gone.cute said:
:cow::cow::cow:

I TRULY BELIEVE SOMETHING MUST HAVE HAPPENED WITH THIS JURY ... SOMETHING !

THERE NEEDS TO BE AN INVESTIGATION IMMEDIATELY INTO THIS POSSIBILITY !

The more the jury foreman and jurors TALK ... the LESS IT MAKES SENSE and the more SUSPICIOUS they sound !

Listen to the jurors' statements : they have a lot of the facts wrong ... their dates are wrong -- June 15 ? I thought JB said in OS June 16 ? ... they thought George was on trial ? -- what "trial" were they watching ? ... they did not know that Cindy committed "perjury" -- they even brought in Cindy's former employer to prove Cindy was at work and NOT doing computer searches for chloroform ... they did NOT understand the meaning of "reasonable doubt" ... they did NOT understand the jury instructions -- then GO ASK THE COURT FOR AN INTERPREATION ! ... did NOT ASK TO REVIEW THE EVIDENCE ... I could go on and on ...

The Jury Foreman is doing some SERIOUS DAMAGE CONTROL right now !

And the Jury Foreman CANNOT EVEN SHOW HIS FACE !

WHAT WHAT WHAT IS HE HIDING ?

I would love to know how much $$ MONEY $$ he was paid by Fox for this interview ...

AGAIN, there needs to be -- AT A MINIMUM -- AN IMMEDIATE INVESTIGATION INTO THE POSSIBILITY OF WHAT WENT WRONG and IF THERE WAS ANY TAMPERING ... and they need to START WITH THE FOREMAN !

I am sorry for the RANT ... but ENOUGH IS ENOUGH ... the MORE WE HEAR, the LESS SENSE IT MAKES ! IT SMELLS ... AND IT SMELLS REAL BAD !

:cow::cow::cow:
Click to expand...

I'm starting to feel the same way! I went back and reviewed JB statements and the video outside the courtroom where he shoots at the camera before the verdict. somehow, some way<mod snip> it matches the way JB has behaved through this trial. it is the only thing that makes sense now. This is why the jury is not talking. this is why that juror left town and retired from her job? where did she get the money to run? makes no sense. WAKE UP FOLKS! 1+1=2. We need to push for an investigation.
 
JSV said:
I remember Lee asking casey in a video jail visit ... Is this like the last time .... Has she had a baby before that she murdered and threw away like trash that no one ever knew about .Sounds like it . MOO
Click to expand...

I also have to wonder if this is why Cindy asked the question...You didn't say anything did you??? FCA: Don't worry, I didn't say anything....


Things that make you go hummmmmm.....
 
I would be more interested in hearing from the two jurors who went into deliberations thinking KC was guilty. I would like to know what happened to make them flip so quickly. I would like to know if they felt in anyway intimidated into changing their votes. I would like to know if there was any actual discussion of the evidence involved in the jury's so-called deliberations. I was not the least impressed with Juror #11. He appeared to be someone to whom talking comes quite easily and I am wondering how persuasive he was in changing the opinions of the two jurors who went in thinking KC was guilty.
 
What boggles my mind is that these jurors didn't anticipate the public's scrutiny of how they came to a NG verdict. The comments they have been making fly in the face of both the evidence and the jury instructions. Did 12 people collectively not understand the evidence and the instructions?
Was someone within the jury giving them the incorrect information and they just took his or her word for it?I'm not suggesting it was intentional (though it could have been).

Juror #2 said several things that really has me scratching my head.It's like someone or several someones convinced the holdouts that they had to vote NG. He said there were initially 6 guilty votes (we've heard another juror say 2,but that was for Felony 1).By the following day "it was clear our side was losing votes." He was the last holdout,but still clearly believes she is guilty.He said looking at those pictures ,he "just can't understand how someone could do that to a child".Do what? Supposedly they bought the accident theory.If the picture was evidence to him,of what someone did to Caylee,why didn't he hold out and it would have been a mistrial? Why did the jurors who voted guilty the first time ,give in?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 167 more.
Total: 4,496 (members: 168, guests: 4,328)

Online statistics

Members online
168
Guests online
4,328
Total visitors
4,496
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,484
Messages
17,969,518
Members
228,782
Latest member
ChasF419
Back
Top