Rehashing, debating and discussing the evidence

IMO, guilty on all counts.

I think that in March 2008 FCA entertained the idea of killing her parents, thus the web searches on neck breaking, household weapons, etc, AND at the same time, thought about how to kill Caylee and stage it, which is why she looked up missing children websites and chloroform. Murder on her mind.

By June FCA's lies and discovered thefts were causing her more problems than she wanted to deal with. CA wasn't providing enough babysitting service to suit her and she had found her new mark in Tony. Caylee as a meal and place-to-stay and job-avoidance ticket was no longer necessary.

Like JA, I hope, anyway, that FCA chloroformed Caylee before suffocating her with the duct tape. I believe the trunk evidence, so think that FCA likely did.

After the fact, I think it is somewhat possible that FCA made some half-arsed attempts to stage Caylee's murder as a kidnapping. That might explain why she intentionally left her purse in plain sight in her abandoned car, and why she left Caylee's car seat and favorite doll in the car.

Could be, though, that she just hoped the car would be stolen so that she could point to a car thief as the person responsible for whatever evidence was found in the car. (I remember a deposition by a FCA friend stating FCA went out of her way to point out Jesse had keys to the car, and so how could FCA know what happened to the car if it had been in someone else's possession, etc.

Mostly I think that after FCA murdered Caylee she completely moved on to her new lie-life with Tony, and that she only thought about Caylee when she could torture her mother on the subject.

I have no doubt she thought she could lie her way out of whatever fallout came up about Caylee's murder. And, pretty much, she has done just that.

I did not vote as I am not certain. I watched the trial, and I must say I was a bit disappointed in the State's complete presentation. I felt they spent too much time on the lies, they did prove that, but there was simple evidence for it. Too little on the murder. Most of the trial was spent at sidebars. Most of the experts canceled each other out (both sides). I felt little was done to focus on the murder and any evidence of it. I felt Caylee was forgotten about, the jury only saw the photos of her remains once, at the beginning of trial iirc. By the end of the trial I was wondering what was off, I recall saying they need to put up some photos of Caylee. The trial was disjointed to me, and not enough time on the relevant factors, too much time on "showboating" and just off to me.

Of course I think FKC is completely guilty, I also saw more evidence than was presented at trial and could consume that evidence in a logical pattern. Not all over the place, according to which expert could testify when or if at all, and not at sidebars where the jurors could not hear or see. I also felt going for Capital Murder/Death Penalty was going to be a big mistake though, since there was no "smoking gun" so to say, so perhaps they should have just went for Murder, IDK.

So, as far as the trial, I still feel it was "off" and it took way too long for what should have only been a one week to two week trial, btw.

Sorry to disappoint, it was just what I observed from my point of view.

I think the only reason JB is not letting KC speak to the media is that it would forever erase the doubt in anyone's mind that KC was responsible for the death of her child. She's not in court now and her silence speaks volumes. jmo

LambChop said:

I think the only reason JB is not letting KC speak to the media is that it would forever erase the doubt in anyone's mind that KC was responsible for the death of her child. She's not in court now and her silence speaks volumes. jmo

Click to expand...

CA is guilty of many crimes. Unfortuntealy the DA did not charge her for the correct crimes. The state was also unable to prove the child died in the way they thought. The Prosecution failed. The Prosecution got it very wrong.

bayouland said:

No mother carries her dead child in the trunk and then dumps her in the trash. I agree 100% unless she is scared chitless because she knows that she can't call 911 and report an accident when it was chloroform.

If I were to believe premediatation it would be because she was at that video store soon afterwards. I'm just not there yet.

I absolutely see your points.

Click to expand...

The evidence in the trial does not support chloroform, does not support there was ever a body in the trunk.

The baby's body was wrapped in a very loving way. The same way the family wrapped up their beloved pets. A family member putting the body in the swamp is not a consistent theory. I believe the baby was to be put under the cement pad. Burying in the backyard and keeping that loved one close. That is a consistent theory.

wonders said:

Could someone please tell me what BARD means?

Click to expand...

Beyond a reasonable doubt.

Mrs. Holmes said:

Thank goodness their is a need for science in our present judical systems.

The moment Vass stated their were "astronomical" amounts of chloroform in his tests is when a "good" scientist goes back over his tests and looks for a problem. In any science testing the moment you have a "skew" and a reading that is way off the charts.... you need to look for why. If he had done a series of tests that "skewed" result would have been thrown out as suspect.

Click to expand...

But no chloroform should have been in the trunk, none, zip, nada. Anything over what would be found in soap or decomposition is a huge marker. The fact that there was a search on the A's computer for "How to make chloroform" just makes is suspect that there could have been chloroform in the trunk. Does not mean it was used on Caylee or that it had anything to do with her death. Just that it is possible that there was some in the trunk. jmo

I have never wavered in believing that KC premeditated Caylee's murder, because of the chloroform searches and the fact that those searches were erased, because of her behavior after Caylee was gone (and her continued lack of remorse), and because she never piped up to say "OK, it was an accident" after getting charged with murder 1.

Mrs. Holmes said:

The evidence in the trial does not support chloroform, does not support there was ever a body in the trunk.

The baby's body was wrapped in a very loving way. The same way the family wrapped up their beloved pets. A family member putting the body in the swamp is not a consistent theory. I believe the baby was to be put under the cement pad. Burying in the backyard and keeping that loved one close. That is a consistent theory.

Click to expand...

All experts at the trial provided evidence and testified there was a body in the trunk. There was no question about it at all. NONE.

Lovingly....hmm.....shoved into two black garbage bags and one polyester bag, three pieces of duct tape taped over her nose and mouth, carried in the trunk of the car for 2.6 days (all irrefutable) and then tossed into a swamp by the side of the road ...none of that is a theory. All proven fact. In my world, there is no love in that scenario whatsoever.

LambChop said:

But no chloroform should have been in the trunk, none, zip, nada. Anything over what would be found in soap or decomposition is a huge marker. The fact that there was a search on the A's computer for "How to make chloroform" just makes is suspect that there could have been chloroform in the trunk. Does not mean it was used on Caylee or that it had anything to do with her death. Just that it is possible that there was some in the trunk. jmo

Click to expand...

What is it with the chloroform? Okay - if chloroform is beyond peeps comprehension, take it out of the scenario completely. Set over on the side there as incidental - the trunk had an overwhelmingly large amount of chloroform in it from another isolated incident.

That leaves OCA taping Caylee's face so that she suffocated, packed in to the bags, left her in the trunk of her car for 2.6 days while she spent most of it in bed with Tony, then she tossed her into a nearby swamp, and lied to her parents about where Caylee for 31 days...

Much more brutal, but murder nonetheless...

bayouland said:

Thank you.

Unlike you, I don't feel I need to connect the dots. I don't need searches for how to make chloroform on the Ants computer to tie FCA to the chloroform. That would just be lagniappe (extra) as we say in Louisiana.

The evidence proved there was a ridiculous level of chloroform in FCA's trunk and that Caylee Marie was in that trunk. That is all I need.

I believe Caylee was sedated more than once by chloroform and more than likely other things as well but that doesn't matter either. Why? Because it only takes once and it is felony child abuse. There are times that Caylee was not around FCA and she wasn't with Grama. Where was she? This is written somewhere in all the pages and pages of documents and I really don't want to dig through them but I remember reading it.

Click to expand...

Is there a need to connect the dots when you are attempting to convict someone of murder with the DP attached?

Does an abnormal level of chloroform in the trunk, determined by testing in a lab that does not meet the standards used in crime labs, meet the burden of proof necessary in a court of law?

Would it be fair to say that even though, Deputy RC was fired for not doing his job, the FBI saw a phantom impression on the carpet and a phantom residue of a heart shaped sticker, and they also got DNA on the duct tape, not to mention they had photos of the duct tape with measurements on them that they decided they would just tell them we don't have them, YM misspoke on the stand, Dr. Vass and JA identified the wrong can as evidence during the trial, KC was cuffed and caged but was not read her Miranda rights, the PT misspoke about the 84 times, none of these things should have been needed to be considered by the jury in deciding their verdict, because the abnormal amount of chloroform in the trunk is all the proof needed to prove KC was guilty of murder beyond a reasonable doubt?

In my opinion, the state needed a lot more than just an unexplained high level of chloroform in the trunk to prove murder BARD.

As always, my entire post is my opinion only.

Mrs. Holmes said:

The evidence in the trial does not support chloroform, does not support there was ever a body in the trunk.

The baby's body was wrapped in a very loving way. The same way the family wrapped up their beloved pets. A family member putting the body in the swamp is not a consistent theory. I believe the baby was to be put under the cement pad. Burying in the backyard and keeping that loved one close. That is a consistent theory.

Click to expand...

Evidence (scientific)proves the pronounced presence of chloroform in the trunk
Evidence proves Caylee was in the trunk. (cadaver dog) (hair)
Evidence proves Caylee was not wrapped in a loving way unless one feels trash bags and laundry bags are sentimental. I am not going there.

Do you believe Caylee was to be buried under a slab in the yard because of the "hit" in the yard by a cadaver dog?

Thanks.

thedeviledadvocate said:

Is there a need to connect the dots when you are attempting to convict someone of murder with the DP attached?

Does an abnormal level of chloroform in the trunk, determined by testing in a lab that does not meet the standards used in crime labs, meet the burden of proof necessary in a court of law?

Would it be fair to say that even though, Deputy RC was fired for not doing his job, the FBI saw a phantom impression on the carpet and a phantom residue of a heart shaped sticker, and they also got DNA on the duct tape, not to mention they had photos of the duct tape with measurements on them that they decided they would just tell them we don't have them, YM misspoke on the stand, Dr. Vass and JA identified the wrong can as evidence during the trial, KC was cuffed and caged but was not read her Miranda rights, the PT misspoke about the 84 times, none of these things should have been needed to be considered by the jury in deciding their verdict, because the abnormal amount of chloroform in the trunk is all the proof needed to prove KC was guilty of murder beyond a reasonable doubt?

In my opinion, the state needed a lot more than just an unexplained high level of chloroform in the trunk to prove murder BARD.

As always, my entire post is my opinion only.

Click to expand...

Please explain what you think happened. Thanks.

When I saw this new thread last night, I thought it might register on the "radar" of the crazy-fanatical-pro-FCA folks who come to WS for no other reason than what this particular thread will afford, and be another opportunity for the FCA-rehab-tour. I am not talking about members who have posted all along or during the trial or of late in the other threads. And I'm not talking about people who have provided their thought-out and logical and reasonable reasons for their opinion that go along with the evidence presented at trial, I respect that.

I guess we'll see how long it takes for this thread to become completely hijacked with nonsense. I hope I am wrong for the sake of those who really want to discuss this again.

IMO, MOO, etc.

NavySubMom said:

When I saw this new thread last night, I thought it might register on the "radar" of the crazy-fanatical-pro-FCA folks who come to WS for no other reason than what this particular thread will afford, and be another opportunity for the FCA-rehab-tour. I am not talking about members who have posted all along or during the trial or of late in the other threads. And I'm not talking about people who have provided their thought-out and logical and reasonable reasons for their opinion that go along with the evidence presented at trial, I respect that.

I guess we'll see how long it takes for this thread to become completely hijacked with nonsense. I hope I am wrong for the sake of those who really want to discuss this again.

IMO, MOO, etc.

Click to expand...

Too late, I think you better buckle up.

logicalgirl said:

What is it with the chloroform? Okay - if chloroform is beyond peeps comprehension, take it out of the scenario completely. Set over on the side there as incidental - the trunk had an overwhelmingly large amount of chloroform in it from another isolated incident.

That leaves OCA taping Caylee's face so that she suffocated, packed in to the bags, left her in the trunk of her car for 2.6 days while she spent most of it in bed with Tony, then she tossed her into a nearby swamp, and lied to her parents about where Caylee for 31 days...

Much more brutal, but murder nonetheless...

Click to expand...

If my theory is wrong, and if I am being to generous to feel that Caylee died from a chloroform overdose, then all remaining evidence points to premeditated murder with one, two and three pieces of duct tape. No doubt about it.

I can't wait for Ashton's book. I am hoping it is a tell it all, but am afraid it won't be.

Here's an interesting piece of news and guess what - no one saw this incident happen either but during the rational and logical process of elimination, the person convicted was the only person who had the opportunity also.

Unless of course SODDI wandered through the scene.....:banghead:

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainmen...ughter-sentenced-to-20-years-for-killing-one/

bayouland said:

If my theory is wrong, and if I am being to generous to feel that Caylee died from a chloroform overdose, then all remaining evidence points to premeditated murder with one, two and three pieces of duct tape. No doubt about it.

I can't wait for Ashton's book. I am hoping it is a tell it all, but am afraid it won't be.

Click to expand...

I think the real question you must make a decision about, considering all of the other circumstances, such as the chloroform would not have kept Caylee asleep for long enough for OCA to spend the next 24 hours in Tony's bed - is whether the overdose of chloroform was deliberate or accidental.

I see nothing that points to accidental...nothing....

logicalgirl said:

All experts at the trial provided evidence and testified there was a body in the trunk. There was no question about it at all. NONE.

Lovingly....hmm.....shoved into two black garbage bags and one polyester bag, three pieces of duct tape taped over her nose and mouth, carried in the trunk of the car for 2.6 days (all irrefutable) and then tossed into a swamp by the side of the road ...none of that is a theory. All proven fact. In my world, there is no love in that scenario whatsoever.

Click to expand...

I disagree that all the experts testified there was a body in the trunk, and I disagree that there was not question about it at all.

When JB had GB under cross, he was trying to get GB to say that GB had scraped food from the containers. JA called for a sidebar, and JB was not allowed to follow that line of questioning. Legally, GB and JA successfully dodged the answers to the question of whether or not food had been in the trash bag. There is no question that there was no food on the containers once they were placed in the drying room. GB did not have to answer the question, did you remove any food from the containers prior to placing them in the drying room. Legally he did not have to, but the question was never asked or answered. Does, not providing the answer to that question prove there was no food in the maggot infested white trash bag, legally yes, but does that remove reasonable doubt as to whether there was food in there, for most yes, for me, not so much.

Without food being in the white trash bag, we have what exactly in evidence that caused the odor? We have a single hair with apparent decomp, but I doubt that has any odor at all. We have an adipocere like fatty substance in the white trash bag, that can't be the odor according to everyone because when the trash bag was removed the odor remained. We also have trace scrapings of butyric acid from the carpet. There was no other physical evidence found in the carpet of the trunk, no blood, no decompositional fluid, none of the right kind of flies or casings, nothing except some trace scrapings of butryic acid. So I must then believe that these trace scrapings of butyric acid are the cause of the horrendous odor, right? There is nothing else in the trunk is there? The FBI says what they analyzed from the carpet was normal, and no blood or decomp fluids. The only other evidence from the trunk was in the air of the trunk, that had shockingly high levels of chloroform. I do not believe it is possible to clean a carpet in a trunk that had enough decomp fluid in it to make the stain in the carpet, so thoroughly that the only thing the FBI could find in that carpet were some traces of butyric acid. To me that is unbelieveable. If one believes that the above proves beyond a reasonable doubt that Caylee was indeed in the trunk for 3 days, then believing the odor was the smell of death is a logical assumption. If one believes the above does not prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Caylee was indeed in the trunk for 3 days, then believing the odor came from the white trash bag is a logical assumption.

For me the states experts failed to prove BARD that there was ever a body in the trunk at all.

As always, my entire post is my opinion only.

LambChop said:

Too late, I think you better buckle up.

Click to expand...

LOL LambChop. You got that right :great:

I was just trying to post "nice" and not go against TOS. I am well aware......... :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: :floorlaugh: